Microsoft Graph MCP Server

list_events_in_range

Retrieve calendar events in a specified date range by providing ISO 8601 start and end dates.

Instructions

List events in a date range. Dates in ISO 8601 format.

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": {
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "list_events_in_range"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`top`	No
`end_date`	Yes
`start_date`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the operation and date format. It omits details like inclusive/exclusive range semantics, ordering, pagination, timezone handling, and whether all calendars or a specific calendar is queried. The verb 'List' implies read-only behavior, but no meaningful behavior beyond that is revealed.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler; the core action is front-loaded and the date-format note directly supports parameter use. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple list operation, the description is minimally viable: an agent can infer the two required date parameters and their format. However, with no output schema, no annotations, and no explanation of the optional top parameter, it is not rich enough to fully prepare an agent to predict behavior or handle edge cases.

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

Parameters2/5

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, but it only clarifies that dates use ISO 8601 format. It adds no meaning for the optional 'top' parameter and does not specify how start_date/end_date bound the range (e.g., inclusive boundaries).

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 action and resource: 'List events in a date range,' which is more precise than the sibling tool name list_upcoming_events and clearly distinguishes it from single-event or instance-focused tools. The date-range qualifier makes the tool's niche apparent from the first sentence.

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 is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as list_upcoming_events or list_event_instances. There is no mention of preferred use cases, exclusions, or conditions that make this tool the right choice.

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

Deploy Server