Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Apple Reminders MCP Server

Apple Reminders MCP Server

by leawn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

updateReminder

Update an existing reminder in Apple Reminders by specifying the list, reminder ID, and optional new title, notes, due date, or priority.

Instructions

Update an existing reminder in Apple Reminders

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "listName": "<listName>",
      "reminderId": "<reminderId>"
    },
    "name": "updateReminder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
listNameYesName of the reminder list
reminderIdYesID of the reminder to update
titleNoNew title for the reminder
notesNoNew notes for the reminder
dueDateNoNew due date in ISO8601 format (use 'none' to clear)
priorityNoNew priority level: 0=none, 1=high, 5=medium, 9=low

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It only says 'update,' implying modification, but omits details on permissions, destructive effects, or response behavior.

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?

Single sentence is concise and to the point, though it could benefit from more detail without being verbose.

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 6 parameters and the existence of sibling tools that perform specific updates, the description lacks context on what this tool updates generally vs. specialized siblings. No output schema information is provided.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no param-specific information beyond the schema, but it does not mislead.

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?

The description clearly states 'Update an existing reminder,' specifying the action and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like createReminder or deleteReminder, though it does not clarify which fields can be updated, relying on the schema.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like completeReminder or uncompleteReminder. The description provides no usage context or exclusion criteria.

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