Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Connections

by icu.connections
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Trash Google Drive files

connections_storage_trash_google_drive_files
Destructive

Move files or folders in the connected Google Drive to Google's Drive Trash, up to 100 per call. Google keeps them 30 days; restore_google_drive_files brings them back. Nothing is deleted for good. Each file is answered on its own; a file shared with the member comes back ok false.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namesNoOptional. Their names, shown on the confirmation card.
personNoLinked person to run this call as (first name). Omit to run as the connection's holder.
dry_runNoPreview only.
projectNoWorkspace to run this call in (id or name).
file_idsYesThe Drive ids to move to the Trash (at most 100).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / dry_run / description
      Previous value: -"Preview only; nothing is written."New value: +"Preview only."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / dry_run / description
      Previous value: -"Preview only: return what this call would do, with nothing written."New value: +"Preview only; nothing is written."
    • addedInput schema / properties / person
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Linked person to run this call as (first name). Omit to run as the connection's holder.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / project
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Workspace to run this call in (id or name).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint/readOnlyHint annotations, the description adds real operational context: 30-day retention, recoverability via restore, batching limit, and per-item outcome semantics ('Each file is answered on its own; a file shared with the member comes back ok false'). That partial-failure disclosure is genuinely useful and not derivable from any structured field. It stops short of permissions/auth requirements and does not mention the dry_run preview path.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, with no filler or repetition of the title. A slightly tighter grouping of the retention/restore facts into one sentence would earn a 5.

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?

For a destructive batch tool with an output schema absent, the description covers everything material: what is affected, the irreversible-window and recovery path, the batch cap, and how individual items can fail. An agent could call this correctly and interpret mixed results without further documentation.

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 already documents all five parameters, and the description adds only the 100-item cap, which the file_ids schema text also states. Baseline 3 applies: the schema carries the parameter burden and the description adds no syntax, ordering, or id-format guidance.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (move files/folders to Google Drive Trash) plus the scope cap of 100 per call, which separates it from delete_file (permanent) and move_google_drive_files (relocation). An agent can identify it from the name-plus-description pair without opening the schema.

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?

Implies the soft-delete use case clearly by asserting 'Nothing is deleted for good' and naming restore_google_drive_files as the reversal path, which tells the agent when to prefer this over a permanent delete. It does not explicitly name the sibling to avoid (connections_storage_delete_file) or state prerequisites such as required Drive permissions, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Connections toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources