icloud-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Calendar Create Event

calendar_create_event

Create iCloud calendar events with recurrence, alerts, location, and attendee invitations via iTIP email. Returns event ID and reports failed invitations.

Instructions

Create a calendar event (optionally recurring, with alerts) and email iTIP invitations to attendees.

Returns the created event including its id/url. If some invitations could not be sent, invitations_failed lists those addresses.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	Yes	End, same format as start. For all-day events the end date is inclusive.
`rrule`	No	RFC 5545 recurrence rule for a repeating event, e.g. 'FREQ=WEEKLY;BYDAY=TU', 'FREQ=WEEKLY;INTERVAL=2;BYDAY=MO', 'FREQ=MONTHLY;BYMONTHDAY=15;COUNT=6'. Do not include DTSTART (the event start is the series start).
`start`	Yes	Start: 'YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS' (interpreted in `timezone`) or 'YYYY-MM-DD' for an all-day event.
`summary`	Yes	Event title.
`location`	No	Event location.
`timezone`	No	IANA timezone for naive start/end values, e.g. 'Europe/Berlin' or 'UTC'. Default: Etc/UTC.
`attendees`	No	Attendee email addresses. Each receives an iTIP invitation by email.
`reminders`	No	Alerts: minutes before the event start (e.g. [60, 10]; 0 = at start, negative = after start) or a time of day on the event's date as 'HH:MM' (e.g. ['09:00'] for an all-day event).
`calendar_id`	No	Calendar URL/ID from calendar_list_calendars. Omit to use all event calendars (or the first one when creating).
`description`	No	Event notes.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and openWorldHint=true, implying external side effects. The description adds valuable context by explicitly mentioning emailing iTIP invitations and the 'invitations_failed' field, which clarifies the external behavior and error handling beyond what annotations convey.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and then the return behavior. Every word is informative, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description covers the core action, return value, and failure handling. It does not explain usage selection, but that is covered under usage_guidelines. Given the complexity (10 parameters, output schema exists), the description is adequate and does not omit critical behavioral information.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides; it mentions the return field but that is not parameter semantics. Thus it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' with a clear resource 'calendar event' and mentions optional features (recurring, alerts) and side effects (iTIP invitations). It also states the return value and failure handling, distinguishing it from siblings like calendar_update_event and calendar_delete_event.

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?

The description clearly states what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like calendar_update_event or calendar_list_events. There are no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' directives, leaving selection to the agent's inference.

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