Skip to main content
Glama

batch_update_doc

Run multiple document updates—insert text, images, tables, formatting, and more—in one atomic batch to avoid index errors and ensure consistency.

Instructions

Executes multiple low-level document operations in a single atomic batch update.

For normal header/footer text, prefer update_doc_headers_footers. Only use create_header_footer here for advanced section-break layouts.

RECOMMENDED WORKFLOW FOR BUILDING DOCUMENTS:

To avoid index calculation errors, build documents in phases:

PHASE 1 - INSERT ALL CONTENT (use end_of_segment=true, no index math): Append text, section breaks, and page breaks sequentially. Each operation appends to the end of the body. No index needed. Example batch: [ {"type": "insert_text", "end_of_segment": true, "text": "Report Title\n"}, {"type": "insert_text", "end_of_segment": true, "text": "\nExecutive Summary\n"}, {"type": "insert_text", "end_of_segment": true, "text": "Revenue grew 15%.\n"}, {"type": "insert_section_break", "end_of_segment": true, "section_type": "NEXT_PAGE"}, {"type": "insert_text", "end_of_segment": true, "text": "Detailed Analysis\n"} ]

PHASE 2 - CREATE HEADERS/FOOTERS (if needed): For normal header/footer text, use update_doc_headers_footers (it auto-creates if missing and writes the content for you). Only include create_header_footer operations in a batch when you are intentionally managing advanced section-break-specific layouts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_google_emailYesUser's Google email address
document_idYesID of the document to update
operationsYesList of operation dicts. Each operation MUST have a 'type' field. All operations accept an optional 'tab_id' to target a specific tab.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It covers atomicity (single atomic batch), low-level nature, and includes caveats about index calculation errors and the workflow to avoid them. It does not explicitly state error handling or return values, but the presence of an output schema mitigates this. Overall, good transparency.

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 relatively long but well-structured with clear sections (RECOMMENDED WORKFLOW, PHASE 1, etc.). It front-loads the purpose and then provides detailed guidelines. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given the complexity of the tool (many operation types) and the presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers main workflows, alternatives, and common pitfalls. It could include more on error handling or specific edge cases, but overall it's thorough.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the recommended use of end_of_segment, the purpose of tab_id and segment_id, and the overall workflow. It provides context that helps the agent use parameters correctly.

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 it executes multiple low-level document operations in a single atomic batch update. It specifies the verb (executes), resource (low-level document operations), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning alternatives like update_doc_headers_footers.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool and when to prefer alternatives. It says 'For normal header/footer text, prefer update_doc_headers_footers' and 'Only use create_header_footer here for advanced section-break layouts.' It also includes a recommended workflow for building documents in phases, which is highly actionable.

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/HuntsDesk/ve-gws'

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