Skip to main content
Glama

Google_drive

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Drive Create File

drive_create_file
Idempotent

Create a new file in Drive with specified name, content, and type (e.g., 'text/plain', 'application/pdf'). Returns the file ID for future reference.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName for the new file
contentYesText content of the file
mime_typeYesMIME type of the file (e.g., "text/plain", "application/json", "text/html")
parent_folder_idNoID of the parent folder (optional, defaults to root)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoID of the newly created file
nameNoName of the created file
errorNoError code if connection failed
messageNoError message with instructions
mimeTypeNoMIME type of the created file
webViewLinkNoURL to open file in Google Drive web interface

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate non-destructive, mutable, idempotent behavior. Description adds return value info but does not disclose file overwrite behavior or permissions needs, adding minimal new context.

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 concise sentences: one for action, one for output. No redundant information.

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?

Adequately describes creation and return of file ID. Could mention default root folder behavior or file size limits, but output schema likely covers return structure.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter. The description provides examples but no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a new file in Drive' with specific parameters (name, content, type), distinguishing from sibling tools that list, get, or search files.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like drive_get_file or drive_list_files. No mention of prerequisites or context-dependent usage.

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

All Google_drive 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all answer queries, and the multiple polymarket_* tools scan for edges and arbitrage. The Drive tools are distinct, but the surrounding 31 unrelated tools create significant ambiguity about which tool to call for a given task.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names are all snake_case, but the pattern is inconsistent: some start with verbs (drive_create_file, ask_pipeworx, validate_claim), some are noun phrases (entity_profile, recent_changes, polymarket_edges), and some are bare verbs (remember, forget, recall). There is no uniform verb_noun convention, and suffixes like _beta and _grounded add further irregularity.

Tool Count1/5

36 tools is far too many for a server named Google_drive, especially since only 5 tools (drive_create_file, drive_get_content, drive_get_file, drive_list_files, drive_search) actually relate to Drive. The other 31 tools cover unrelated domains like Pipeworx data queries, Polymarket betting, and memory management, making the tool count wildly disproportionate to the server's apparent purpose.

Completeness2/5

For a Google Drive server, the tool set is incomplete: it covers create, get content, get metadata, list, and search, but lacks essential operations like updating, deleting, uploading, moving, copying files, creating folders, or managing permissions/sharing. These gaps would force agents to work around missing core Drive functionality.

Resources