Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

OurFamilyWizard MCP

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

ofw_delete_event

Destructive

Deletes an OurFamilyWizard calendar event after previewing it and confirming with the user; refuses if the event changed to prevent accidental removal of shared events.

Instructions

Delete an OurFamilyWizard calendar event. Reads the event first; deleting one the co-parent can see is confirmed first, with a preview of exactly which event (title, date, time) is removed, and is refused if the event changed on OFW after that preview. If the request fails without a definitive answer the result is EVENT_UNCONFIRMED: the event may already be gone, so do NOT retry until ofw_list_events shows whether it is still there. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call performs NO write and returns a preview of exactly what would happen plus a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventIdYesEvent id — the `id` from ofw_list_events / eventRecurrenceId from ofw_create_event
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.
includeFutureNoFor repeating events: also delete future occurrences (default false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.19.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv2.8.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: pre-read of the event, confirmation preview with title/date/time, refusal if the event changed after preview, and the EVENT_UNCONFIRMED failure mode with an explicit no-retry instruction. These are exactly the operational traits an agent needs for a destructive tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the action and its side effects, and every sentence carries operational content, but the two confirmation paragraphs overlap somewhat (elicitation vs. fallback restates the same preview-then-proceed contract). Slightly longer than strictly necessary, though nothing is wasted in a way that hurts selection.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description fully covers mutation semantics, the confirmation protocol, the failure mode, and retry policy. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly and safely is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description goes further by explaining the confirmToken lifecycle (first call performs no write, repeat call with the token proceeds) and the includeFuture-relevant confirmation flow. The remaining param detail (eventId source, includeFuture default) lives in the schema, which is acceptable.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ("Delete an OurFamilyWizard calendar event") and clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like ofw_list_events, ofw_create_event, and ofw_update_event. An agent can identify exactly what this does without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit when-to-use rules (after reading the event, after user confirmation), a when-NOT path (do not retry on EVENT_UNCONFIRMED until ofw_list_events confirms state), and names the sibling to consult. This is unusually complete routing guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools