Skip to main content
Glama

respond_event

Accept, decline, or tentatively respond to Microsoft Outlook event invitations using specified account and event IDs through the Microsoft MCP server.

Instructions

Respond to event invitation (accept, decline, tentativelyAccept)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idYes
event_idYes
messageNo
responseNoaccept

Implementation Reference

  • The 'respond_event' tool handler function, decorated with @mcp.tool for automatic registration. It sends a POST request to the Microsoft Graph API to respond to a calendar event invitation with the specified response type (accept, decline, or tentativelyAccept), optionally including a comment.
    @mcp.tool
    def respond_event(
        account_id: str,
        event_id: str,
        response: str = "accept",
        message: str | None = None,
    ) -> dict[str, str]:
        """Respond to event invitation (accept, decline, tentativelyAccept)"""
        payload: dict[str, Any] = {"sendResponse": True}
        if message:
            payload["comment"] = message
    
        graph.request("POST", f"/me/events/{event_id}/{response}", account_id, json=payload)
        return {"status": response}
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it implies a write/mutation operation (responding changes invitation status), it lacks critical details: required permissions, whether responses are reversible, side effects (e.g., notifications sent), or error conditions. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place: 'Respond to event invitation' establishes the action, and the parenthetical lists response options without redundancy. It's appropriately sized for this tool's complexity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (mutation operation with 4 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral traits like side effects or error handling, and parameter semantics are only partially addressed. For a tool that modifies event states, more context is needed to ensure safe and correct usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions response types (accept, decline, tentativelyAccept), which clarifies the 'response' parameter's purpose, but doesn't explain 'account_id', 'event_id', or 'message'. The description adds some value but doesn't fully address the coverage gap for all four parameters.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Respond to event invitation') and enumerates the three possible response types (accept, decline, tentativelyAccept). It uses precise verbs and distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'create_event' or 'update_event' by focusing on invitation responses rather than event creation or modification.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing event invitation), exclusions, or how it differs from related tools like 'update_event' for modifying event details. Without such context, an agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/elyxlz/microsoft-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server