Skip to main content
Glama
killbottleneck-mcp

killbottleneck-mcp

Official

delete_calendar

Deletes a shared calendar by ID or name along with all its events (admin or manager only). Use only when the calendar and history should not be kept; this action cannot be undone.

Instructions

Delete a shared calendar by id or name together with ALL its events (admin or manager only). Cannot be undone — prefer archiving (not offered here) when the history should stay.

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": {
      "calendar": "<calendar>"
    },
    "name": "delete_calendar"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
calendarYesid or name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full safety burden; it does so by declaring the operation irreversible, cascading deletion of ALL events, and the admin/manager permission requirement. It does not cover not-found behavior, response shape, or whether any soft-delete or recovery path exists.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action and scope, followed by the permission and irreversibility warning. There is no filler, and the warning is placed where an agent will see it before acting.

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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with no annotations or output schema, the description supplies the critical operational facts: authorization, cascade, irreversibility, and a safer alternative. It is adequate, though not exhaustive about edge cases such as ambiguous names or missing calendars.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema as 'id or name,' and the description repeats that selector without adding format, resolution, or disambiguation rules. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb (delete), resource (shared calendar), selector (id or name), and scope (all its events). It clearly distinguishes this from delete_event by making clear that the entire calendar and every event in it are removed.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an authorization condition (admin or manager only) and recommends archiving when history should remain, while noting archiving is not offered here. It does not explicitly compare itself with delete_event for removing individual events, though the cascade scope implies that distinction.

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