grr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

calendar.calendars.patch

Update selected metadata fields on an existing Google Calendar using PATCH semantics, changing only properties like description, location, time zone, or auto-accept invitations.

Instructions

Updates metadata for a calendar. This method supports patch semantics [HTTP PATCH] — updates the resource; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON Calendar object accepting autoAcceptInvitations, conferenceProperties, dataOwner, description, etag, id, kind, labelProperties and 3 more fields; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: clear, delete, get, insert, transferOwnership, update.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	No	Extra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
`params`	No	Parameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
`dry_run`	No	Return the request that would be sent, without sending it.
`body_file`	No	Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON Calendar object.
`calendarId`	Yes	[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
`request_body`	No	Request body of type Calendar: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`etag`	No
`kind`	No
`summary`	No
`location`	No
`timeZone`	No
`dataOwner`	No
`description`	No
`labelProperties`	No
`conferenceProperties`	No
`autoAcceptInvitations`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / body_file / description

Previous value: -"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters."New value: +"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON Calendar object."

addedInput schema / properties / request_body

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type Calendar: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "autoAcceptInvitations": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "conferenceProperties": {
+      "properties": {
+        "allowedConferenceSolutionTypes": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "dataOwner": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "etag": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "labelProperties": {
+      "properties": {
+        "eventLabels": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "backgroundColor": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "id": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "name": {
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "location": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "timeZone": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

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"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "autoAcceptInvitations": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "conferenceProperties": {
+      "properties": {
+        "allowedConferenceSolutionTypes": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "dataOwner": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "etag": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "labelProperties": {
+      "properties": {
+        "eventLabels": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "backgroundColor": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "id": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "name": {
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "location": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "timeZone": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses that this is a mutation using PATCH semantics, that it is blocked in readonly safety profiles, and that it returns the response resource as JSON. It does not cover permission requirements or behavior of unspecified fields.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, which is good. But the middle sentence is dense and enumerates body fields ('and 3 more fields') that the schema already lists, adding length without much value.

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?

An output schema exists, so returns needn't be explained, yet the description still notes JSON output. Combined with mutation semantics, safety-profile blocking, and body-passing options, it is nearly complete for an agent to invoke correctly; only permission/field-overwrite behavior is unaddressed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema documents calendarId and the request body fully. The description adds the dual-passing mechanism ('pass it via params or whole via body_file') which is mildly useful, but field enumeration duplicates the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Updates metadata for a calendar') and clarifies PATCH semantics (partial update). It lists sibling operations but does not distinguish specifically why to use patch over update, which is the key ambiguity in the calendar family.

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?

Gives one important exclusion ('refused under --readonly safety profiles') and names siblings including update. However, it never explains the patch-vs-update choice, which is exactly the decision an agent must make between the two closest siblings. Usage is only implied.

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

Deploy Server