mcp-google-sheets-server

sheets_update_chart

Update an existing chart in Google Sheets by providing its ID, and optionally set a new title or data range.

Instructions

Update an existing chart in Google Sheets

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "spreadsheetId": "<spreadsheetId>",
      "chartId": "<chartId>"
    },
    "name": "sheets_update_chart"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No	New title for the chart
`chartId`	Yes	The ID of the chart to update
`dataRange`	No	New data range for the chart
`spreadsheetId`	Yes	The ID of the spreadsheet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.2.1Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations and the description does not disclose side effects, failure behavior, or whether the chart must already exist. The word 'Update' implies modification, but nothing is said about what happens if chartId is invalid or if no update fields are supplied.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no filler or redundant phrases. It is appropriately concise and front-loads the action.

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?

The description is too sparse to be complete for an agent invoking the tool. It omits how title and dataRange interact, whether both are optional, what should happen if only one is provided, and how it differs from the similar sheets_update_chart_data tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself provides basic definitions for all parameters.

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 states the verb and resource ('Update an existing chart in Google Sheets'), but it does not specify which aspects of the chart can be updated. With sibling tools like sheets_update_chart_data, the description is too generic to clearly distinguish this tool's scope.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sheets_update_chart_data or sheets_create_chart. The description does not mention that title and dataRange are optional or that at least one should be provided.

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