Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
google-workspace-mcp

google-workspace-mcp

by smk-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

calendar_events_list

List events from a Google Calendar account for a specified time range using RFC3339 timestamps, with optional search query and result limit.

Instructions

List events. time_min/time_max are RFC3339 (e.g. '2026-06-05T00:00:00-07:00').

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": {
      "account": "<account>"
    },
    "name": "calendar_events_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNo
accountYes
time_maxNo
time_minNo
calendar_idNoprimary
max_resultsNo
single_eventsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.2

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only provides a format tip for time_min/time_max (RFC3339) but omits other behaviors like pagination, default ordering, or authentication requirements.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very short (one sentence + example), which is concise but under-specifies the tool. It front-loads the action but lacks necessary details for effective use.

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?

With 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It should explain each parameter's purpose, default behavior, and response structure to enable correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0%. The description only adds meaning for time_min/time_max (format example). Other parameters (account, calendar_id, query, max_results, single_events) remain undocumented, offering minimal additional value.

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 says 'List events', which clearly identifies the action and resource. Given the tool name 'calendar_events_list', it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'calendar_event_get' (single event) or 'calendar_event_create'.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., calendar_event_get, calendar_search). The description only lists the tool's basic function without context for decision-making.

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