Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

calendar.acl.delete

Removes a Calendar ACL rule by calendar and rule ID, permanently revoking that user's or group's access; use it to clean up sharing permissions. Irreversible and blocked in read-only mode.

Instructions

Deletes an access control rule [HTTP DELETE] — removes the resource; irreversible unless the API documents a trash/undo flow; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the post-delete resource state (or empty) as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: get, insert, list, patch, update, watch.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
ruleIdYes[URL path segment] ACL rule identifier.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters.
calendarIdYes[URL path segment] Calendar identifier. To retrieve calendar IDs call the calendarList.list method. If you want to access the primary calendar of the currently logged in user, use

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / calendarId / description
      Previous value: -"Calendar identifier. To retrieve calendar IDs call the calendarList.list method. If you want to access the primary calendar of the currently logged in user, use"New value: +"[URL path segment] Calendar identifier. To retrieve calendar IDs call the calendarList.list method. If you want to access the primary calendar of the currently logged in user, use"
    • changedInput schema / properties / ruleId / description
      Previous value: -"ACL rule identifier."New value: +"[URL path segment] ACL rule identifier."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses irreversibility, the possible trash/undo caveat, refusal under --readonly safety profiles, and the post-delete return payload (resource state or empty) as JSON.

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?

One front-loaded block that opens with the verb and resource, then layers safety and return-value notes. The CLI-flag detail (--readonly) is somewhat tangential but compact; no sentence is fully wasted.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the return value. With 100% schema coverage and strong safety disclosure, the remaining gap is authorization requirements for deleting an ACL rule on a calendar.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description goes slightly further by explaining how the body is assembled (typed parameters override the `params` map, or the body is read whole from `body_file`), which clarifies the interplay the schema only states piecemeal.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Deletes an access control rule") plus the HTTP method, and explicitly enumerates the sibling operations over the same resource (get, insert, list, patch, update, watch), so an agent can place it precisely among the calendar.acl tools without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Listing the sibling operations aids selection, but no conditions are given for choosing delete over patch/update (e.g. remove a grant vs. modify permissions), and no prerequisites (ownership rights on the calendar) are stated. Usage is only implied by the verb.

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