Skip to main content
Glama

update_label

Modify an existing Gmail label's name, visibility settings, or color scheme to improve email organization and management.

Instructions

Update an existing label

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe ID of the label to update
nameNoThe display name of the label
messageListVisibilityNoThe visibility of messages with this label in the message list
labelListVisibilityNoThe visibility of the label in the label list
colorNoThe color settings for the label

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:480-499 (registration)
    Registration of the update_label tool, including input schema (Zod validation) and inline handler function that performs a full update on a Gmail label using the Gmail API's users.labels.update method.
    server.tool("update_label",
      "Update an existing label",
      {
        id: z.string().describe("The ID of the label to update"),
        name: z.string().optional().describe("The display name of the label"),
        messageListVisibility: z.enum(['show', 'hide']).optional().describe("The visibility of messages with this label in the message list"),
        labelListVisibility: z.enum(['labelShow', 'labelShowIfUnread', 'labelHide']).optional().describe("The visibility of the label in the label list"),
        color: z.object({
          textColor: z.string().describe("The text color of the label as hex string"),
          backgroundColor: z.string().describe("The background color of the label as hex string")
        }).optional().describe("The color settings for the label")
      },
      async (params) => {
        const { id, ...labelData } = params
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.labels.update({ userId: 'me', id, requestBody: labelData })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • The handler function for the update_label tool. It extracts the label ID and update data from params, uses the shared handleTool helper to authenticate and call the Gmail API to update the label, then formats the response.
    async (params) => {
      const { id, ...labelData } = params
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.labels.update({ userId: 'me', id, requestBody: labelData })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Input schema for the update_label tool, defined using Zod, specifying required label ID and optional fields for name, visibilities, and color.
      id: z.string().describe("The ID of the label to update"),
      name: z.string().optional().describe("The display name of the label"),
      messageListVisibility: z.enum(['show', 'hide']).optional().describe("The visibility of messages with this label in the message list"),
      labelListVisibility: z.enum(['labelShow', 'labelShowIfUnread', 'labelHide']).optional().describe("The visibility of the label in the label list"),
      color: z.object({
        textColor: z.string().describe("The text color of the label as hex string"),
        backgroundColor: z.string().describe("The background color of the label as hex string")
      }).optional().describe("The color settings for the label")
    },
  • Shared helper function handleTool used by update_label (and other tools) to handle OAuth2 authentication, credential validation, Gmail client creation, and API call execution with error handling.
    const handleTool = async (queryConfig: Record<string, any> | undefined, apiCall: (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => Promise<any>) => {
      try {
        const oauth2Client = queryConfig ? createOAuth2Client(queryConfig) : defaultOAuth2Client
        if (!oauth2Client) throw new Error('OAuth2 client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const credentialsAreValid = await validateCredentials(oauth2Client)
        if (!credentialsAreValid) throw new Error('OAuth2 credentials are invalid, please re-authenticate')
    
        const gmailClient = queryConfig ? google.gmail({ version: 'v1', auth: oauth2Client }) : defaultGmailClient
        if (!gmailClient) throw new Error('Gmail client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const result = await apiCall(gmailClient)
        return result
      } catch (error: any) {
        return `Tool execution failed: ${error.message}`
      }
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Update an existing label' implies a mutation operation but doesn't specify permissions required, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what happens to unspecified fields. It lacks critical context for safe and effective use.

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?

The description is extremely concise—a single sentence with no wasted words. However, it's arguably too brief given the tool's complexity (5 parameters including nested objects) and lack of annotations, which might warrant more explanatory content.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'update' entails (partial vs. full updates), error conditions, or return values. The agent must rely entirely on the input schema without behavioral context.

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?

The description adds no parameter information beyond what's in the schema, which has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 5 parameters. This meets the baseline of 3 since the schema adequately documents inputs, but the description doesn't enhance understanding of parameter interactions or optionality.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update an existing label' clearly states the action (update) and resource (label), but it's quite generic and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'patch_label' or 'create_label'. It lacks specificity about what aspects of a label can be updated.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'patch_label' or 'create_label'. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing label ID) or contextual constraints, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/HitmanLy007/gmail-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server