# Calendly API + MCP vs Reclaim.ai (slim)

> Calendly scores 69.1 (B) to Reclaim.ai's 37.9 (F) for calendar access. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/calendly-vs-reclaim-ai.md (~4,250 tokens) · this version ~2,330 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/calendly-vs-reclaim-ai.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/calendly-vs-reclaim-ai
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-07
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Calendly API + MCP scores 69.1 (B) on agent readiness against Reclaim.ai's 37.9 (F), and leads in every scored category. Both do calendar access.

- Calendly API + MCP: B 69.1, rank #259 of 1486 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/calendly.min.md
- Reclaim.ai: F 37.9, rank #1349 of 1486 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/reclaim-ai.min.md
- Calendly API + MCP, good for Best when the host already schedules through Calendly and the agent needs to find a slot and book or cancel it. Ahead on Reliability, 85 against 45; Schema & documentation, 86 against 28; Agent ergonomics, 61 against 30; Security & auth, 70 against 53; Payments & pricing, 30 against 25; Maintenance & community, 60 against 25; Transparency & trust, 80 against 56.
- Reclaim.ai, good for Individuals and teams who already run their calendar through Reclaim and want an assistant to plan their week with approval.

| Category | Calendly API + MCP | Reclaim.ai |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 85 | 45 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 86 | 28 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 61 | 30 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 70 | 53 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 30 | 25 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 60 | 25 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 80 | 56 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Calendly API + MCP | Reclaim.ai |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Kind | HTTP API | MCP server |
| Vendor | Calendly | Reclaim.ai Inc. |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://api.calendly.com` | `https://mcp.reclaim.ai` |
| Transports | HTTP, Streamable HTTP | Streamable HTTP |
| Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth |
| Tools exposed | 39 | none |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-30 | none |
| Terms last updated | 2026-08-05 | 2024-04-08 |
| Privacy policy last updated | 2026-07-03 | 2025-06-25 |
| Terms restrict automated access | not found in the text | yes |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not found in the text | yes |
| Agent reviews | 4/5 (2) | none |

Why the edge:
- Schema & documentation, Calendly API + MCP +58: Calendly API + MCP 86 (OpenAPI 3.1 for the scheduling API and a separate one for OAuth, in JSON and YAML (25). llms.txt with about 130 links and Markdown copies of every docs page (10). Reference pages and MCP tool docs mark plan requirements such as paid plan for booking and Teams for routing forms (14). Typed parameters in the spec (12). 400, 401, 403, 404, 409, 424 and 500 responses in the spec. 429 appears on 9 of 65 operations, the contacts endpoints, on 1 November 2026 (12). Dated release notes, latest 30 October 2026. The API version only changes by migration, the last one being v1 to v2 (13).); Reclaim.ai 28 (MCP tools carry JSON Schema by protocol, but Reclaim publishes no tool list or schemas and we did not open a session (15, as for Linear). No llms.txt (404) (0). Tool descriptions not readable (5). Input typing not verifiable (5). Setup and troubleshooting steps for each client, with no tool examples or error responses (3 of 15). No changelog or versioning for the MCP server found (0). 15 + 0 + 5 + 5 + 3 + 0 = 28.)
- Reliability, Calendly API + MCP +40: Calendly API + MCP 85 (incident.io status page with separate Calendly API and Webhooks components, plus each calendar provider (20). The page shows 100% uptime for the API and Webhooks components from August to November 2026, and its RSS feed, read on 1 November 2026, lists one completed maintenance window (6 September) and no incidents, so a clean record (30). 500 requests a minute per user on paid plans, 50 on Free, and booking capped at 10 a minute, 50 an hour and 100 a day below Enterprise (15). 429 with X-RateLimit-Limit, -Remaining and -Reset headers and exponential backoff advice, but no idempotency key or safe-retry guidance for booking writes (10). No SLA found on any plan (0). API v2 is GA (10).); Reclaim.ai 45 (Graded as a hosted service on the MCP server at mcp.reclaim.ai. Statuspage at status.reclaim.ai with components for each calendar, integration and the scheduler, but none for MCP (15, the value for a vendor page with no component for the product). The history feed lists one incident since 8 August, a Microsoft 365 outage affecting some connected accounts on 31 August to 1 September 2026, caused upstream (20). No rate limits found (0). No 429 or retry guidance found; webhook receivers are asked to treat events as idempotent (0). No SLA found (0). The MCP server is not labelled beta (10). 15 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 45.)
- Maintenance & community, Calendly API + MCP +35: Calendly API + MCP 60 (Latest release note on 30 October 2026 (Teams API), two days before this check (30). Four dated entries since 3 August (25 August, 22, 23 and 30 October) (20). Public release notes and a developer support route, no public issue tracker (10). No official SDKs (0). No package to assess (0).); Reclaim.ai 25 (No changelog or release notes found, so the last MCP change can't be dated; the MCP overview was updated "over 3 weeks ago" and the Cursor guide is recent (20, from the article date). No dated release entries (0). Support by email and in-app chat, with no public changelog or tracker (5 of 15). Not in the official MCP registry, which lists only community Reclaim servers, and no official SDK (0). No package to check (0). 20 + 0 + 5 + 0 + 0 = 25.)
- Agent ergonomics, Calendly API + MCP +31: Calendly API + MCP 61 (39 MCP tools on the supported tools page on 1 November 2026 (5), with 5 back for two skill tools that load task guidance on demand and 2 for `count` on REST lists (12). `next_page` pagination and time and status filters on scheduled events (17). Error codes in the spec, and Free users get a clear 403 on booking (15). MCP tools carry readOnlyHint, destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the REST booking call has no idempotency key (12). No official SDK, and the user URI from /users/me is needed before most calls (5).); Reclaim.ai 30 (Tool count not published (5). Paging and filtering not documented (5 of 20). No documented error responses (3 of 20). The integration page says read-only tools answer at once and calendar writes go to Preview Mode, so a repeated write is staged rather than applied twice; annotations were not readable (12 of 20). One URL with OAuth and no SDK (5 of 15). 5 + 5 + 3 + 12 + 5 = 30.)
- Transparency & trust, Calendly API + MCP +24: Calendly API + MCP 80 (Closed service with customer terms and a separate developer policy (15). Privacy notice (3 July 2026) gives no retention periods, and the no-AI-training statement sits on the security page, not in the privacy notice (18). The v1 to v2 migration notice is dated 26 March 2025 and legacy token behaviour under scopes is written down (12). Sub-processor list linked from the privacy notice, which says data sits in the US or wherever providers operate. We didn't open the list (16).); Reclaim.ai 56 (Closed service under terms of 8 April 2024 naming Reclaim.ai Inc. (15 of 30). The privacy policy (25 June 2025) keeps data as long as reasonably necessary, the security page describes self-service deletion of calendar data, and Data Privacy Framework participation is claimed, with no retention periods (15 of 30). Reclaim 1.0 users are moved to 2.0, and no deprecation policy or dates were found (3 of 20). A public subprocessor list names AWS, Google and others with links to their terms (15 of 20). 15 + 15 + 3 + 15 = 48.)
- Security & auth, Calendly API + MCP +17: Calendly API + MCP 70 (OAuth 2.1 with PKCE and dynamic client registration on the MCP, and per-resource scopes such as `scheduled_events:read` and `availability:write` for new OAuth apps and new personal access tokens since March 2026. Tokens issued before scopes keep full access (28). Read scopes, `mcp:scheduling:read` and `mcp:scheduling:write` for the MCP, and destructiveHint on cancel, delete and revoke tools, but no confirmation step of its own (15). Invitee names and booking answers written by outsiders reach the model, with no injection guidance found (0). `activity_log:read` and audit logs on Enterprise (10). SOC 2 Type 2, ISO 27001, CSA STAR, an annual penetration test and a valid security.txt. No public bug bounty found (17).); Reclaim.ai 53 (OAuth sign-in for MCP clients, with no scopes published; tokens stay out of URLs (20 of 30). Calendar writes are staged in Preview Mode and apply only after the user approves them in Reclaim, and the docs recommend per-tool approval in the client (18 of 20). Event titles, descriptions and invitee text reach the model, and no prompt-injection guidance was found (0). Preview Mode shows proposed changes, and no audit log of agent actions was found (3 of 15). The security page claims SOC 2, GDPR, CCPA and Data Privacy Framework certification and a subprocessor list is public; security.txt redirected in a loop and no disclosure policy was found (12 of 20). 20 + 18 + 0 + 3 + 12 = 53.)