Skip to main content
Glama

local-mcp

by com.local-mcp

Gdrive Read File

gdrive_read_file
Read-only

Reads a text file from the synced Google Drive folder (.txt, .md, .csv, .json, code files...). Note: native Google Docs/Sheets/Slides sync as .gdoc/.gsheet pointers, not real files — export them from Drive or read Office/PDF copies instead. Auto-detects UTF-8 with Latin-1/CP1252 fallback. For files outside Google Drive, use file_read.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAbsolute path to the file
offsetNoStart byte offset (default 0)
encodingNo'auto' (default), 'utf8', 'latin1', 'cp1252', 'ascii', 'utf16'
max_bytesNoMax bytes (default 1MB, cap 10MB)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAbsolute path of the file
bytesYesTotal file size in bytes
offsetNoByte offset the read started at
contentYesDecoded file text content
encodingNoEncoding used to decode (utf8 | cp1252 | latin1 | ascii | utf16)
truncatedNoTrue if more content remains beyond what was returned
bytes_readNoNumber of bytes read in this slice

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds useful behavioral context: it auto-detects UTF-8 with Latin-1/CP1252 fallback, and warns about .gdoc/.gsheet pointer files. It does not contradict any annotation and enhances the agent's understanding of edge cases.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, then important caveats, and closes with an alternative. Every sentence adds value with no waste.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the presence of an output schema, complete parameter documentation, and read-only annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: file types, encoding behavior, Google Drive specifics, and when to use a different tool. The tool is simple, and the description leaves no major questions.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description's mention of auto-detected encoding aligns with the encoding parameter but adds no new syntax beyond the schema. This matches the baseline 3.

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 clearly states the tool 'Reads a text file from the synced Google Drive folder' with a specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from the sibling file_read by explicitly noting 'For files outside Google Drive, use file_read'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use (text files in the synced Google Drive folder) and when-not-to-use (native Google Docs/Sheets/Slides, which sync as .gdoc/.gsheet pointers). It also names an alternative (file_read) for files outside Google Drive.

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

All local-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct per app (e.g., chrome_*, safari_*, m365_*), but there is notable overlap between generic file tools like `file_list` and `finder_list`, both listing files; `search_contacts` and `list_contacts` serve similar purposes; `report_friction` and `report_problem` both send feedback to the team. The large number of tools with similar purposes in different domains creates moderate ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is very consistent overall: most tools follow a `{app}_action` or `verb_noun` pattern (e.g., `chrome_click`, `create_calendar_event`, `list_reminders`). There are minor deviations like `lmcp_install_upgrade` (two verbs) and `complete_omnifocus_task` vs. `complete_reminder` (inconsistent verb placement). Still, the pattern is predictable and readable across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

With 225 tools, the surface is extremely large and heavy. While it covers many distinct domains (browsers, mail, calendar, files, notes, reminders, video editing, web automation, etc.), the sheer number makes it hard to navigate and likely includes many rarely-used tools. This is far beyond the well-scoped range of 3-15 tools and feels excessive even for a 'local everything' MCP server.

Completeness3/5

For many app integrations, the tool set provides solid CRUD coverage (e.g., Calendar has create, read, update, delete; Apple Notes has create, read, update, list, search; OmniFocus has create, list, search, complete). However, some areas are incomplete: for example, there is no tool to create a new Mail folder or delete notes. The 'web' tools lack a clear update/delete for saved sessions. The suite is broad but has notable gaps within individual domains.

Resources