Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Sites MCP

Google Sites MCP

by RXDG2908
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Add a text box

gsites_add_text

Insert a formatted text box at the end of the open Google Sites page, with options for headings, lists, bold text, and alignment.

Instructions

Insert a text box with the given text at the end of the open page. New content goes after the currently selected section; by default the last section is selected first so content is appended at the end. Use gsites_move_section to reorder afterwards. Style: normal | title | heading | subtitle | small. Use '\n' for new lines. 'list' turns the lines into bullets or a numbered list. 'bold' makes all text bold. Examples: {text:"Mis proyectos", style:"heading"}, {text:"HTML\nCSS\nJS", list:"bullets"}.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "gsites_add_text"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boldNo
listNonone
textYesText to write; use \n between paragraphs/list items
alignNoleft
styleNonormal

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world). The description adds genuinely useful behavior: insertion depends on hidden selection state and defaults to end-of-page, and reordering requires a separate call. It omits prerequisites entirely, e.g. that a site/page must be open and that each call adds a new box rather than editing existing text.

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?

Front-loaded with the primary action and placement rule, then compact parameter notes and two concrete examples. Slight redundancy: the style values are restated from the schema enum, and the list/bullet note repeats what the enum already implies.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers text, style, list, and bold behavior well but is silent on 'align' and on the prerequisite browser/site state needed before the call succeeds. An agent could invoke it but might misfire on alignment or call it without an open page.

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 20% (only 'text' is documented), so the description carries real weight and does explain that 'list' converts lines to bullets/numbered items, 'bold' applies to all text, and '\n' separates items. It never mentions the 'align' parameter, leaving one of five parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: 'Insert a text box with the given text at the end of the open page.' An agent can tell this apart from gsites_add_block and gsites_type by the text-box framing, but the description never explicitly contrasts those near-siblings, leaving the differentiation to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It explains placement behavior (append at end, after the currently selected section, last section selected by default) and routes reordering to gsites_move_section. However it never mentions gsites_set_insert_point, the sibling that actually controls where content lands, nor states when to prefer gsites_add_block or gsites_type instead.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools