TimeTree MCP Server

delete_event_occurrence

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete one occurrence of a recurring event, or that occurrence and all later ones, while keeping the rest of the series.

Instructions

Delete one occurrence of a recurring event, or that occurrence and all later ones (scope "this_and_following"), keeping the rest of the series. Use delete_event to delete the whole series. Get the series uuid and occurrence_start_at from get_events with start_before set. Deleting from the first occurrence onward deletes the whole series. Cannot be undone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scope`	No	"this" (default) changes only this occurrence; "this_and_following" also changes every later one
`event_uuid`	Yes	The recurring series uuid (the uuid get_events returns for every occurrence)
`calendar_id`	Yes	The calendar ID from list_calendars (numeric string; numbers are also accepted)
`occurrence_start_at`	Yes	Start of the occurrence, exactly as get_events returned it (ISO 8601), or Unix ms

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scope`	Yes
`message`	No
`success`	Yes
`series_uuid`	Yes
`series_deleted`	Yes	True when the whole series was deleted
`occurrence_start_at`	Yes	ISO 8601 date-time (UTC)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.7.0Oct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those annotations: the deletion cannot be undone and the special case where starting at the first occurrence removes the entire series. It does not discuss side effects such as attendee notifications, but given the annotation coverage this is a strong disclosure.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, followed by the sibling alternative and required prerequisites. Every sentence carries actionable information.

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?

For a destructive recurring-event deletion tool, the description covers purpose, scope choices, sibling alternative, identifier sourcing, edge-case behavior, and irreversibility. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described.

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 nevertheless adds practical retrieval semantics: event_uuid and occurrence_start_at should come from get_events with start_before set, and it clarifies the scope distinction between deleting one occurrence versus that occurrence and all later ones.

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 states a specific verb (delete) and resource (one occurrence of a recurring event) and explicitly distinguishes the scope from sibling delete_event, which deletes the whole series. An agent can tell exactly which tool to choose without opening schemas.

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 names the alternative (delete_event for the whole series), explains how to obtain the required identifiers via get_events with start_before, and warns that deleting from the first occurrence onward deletes the whole series. These are explicit when-to-use and prerequisite instructions.

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