Skip to main content
Glama

0nMCP — Universal AI API Orchestrator

get_calendars

List all CRM calendars

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It states the operation is a list, implying a read-only behavior, but provides no details on return structure, pagination, or permissions. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description tells the agent the tool returns a list of calendars but does not specify the fields or structure of calendar objects. This is a minor gap; however, for a simple list operation, it is largely adequate.

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

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details because none are needed.

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 the specific verb 'List' and names the resource 'all CRM calendars', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_appointments and get_contact.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_appointments. However, the resource name ('calendars') implies usage for calendar listing, providing only implicit context.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct actions (create/get/update/search for contacts, opportunities, etc.). However, send_email overlaps with send_message which explicitly supports email, and verify_service is an outlier unrelated to the CRM-focused tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_contact, get_pipelines, send_message). The naming is predictable and uniform across the entire set.

Tool Count3/5

17 tools is at the heavy end for a CRM-focused server, and the 'Universal AI API Orchestrator' name suggests broader capabilities than the actual tool set. The count is not extreme but feels slightly over-scoped for what is offered.

Completeness3/5

Contact and opportunity management cover create/read/update/search with additional note/tag features, but there are no delete operations for contacts or opportunities, and appointment creation is missing. The verify_service tool adds an unrelated capability, leaving some CRM lifecycle gaps.

Resources