google-workspace-mcp-advanced

update_task_list

Update the title of a task list in Google Tasks, with an optional dry run to preview changes before saving.

Instructions

Update an existing task list.

Args: user_google_email (str): The user's Google email address. Required. task_list_id (str): The ID of the task list to update. title (str): The new title for the task list. dry_run (bool): If True, preview the update without mutating the task list.

Returns: str: Confirmation message with updated task list details.

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": {
      "user_google_email": "<user_google_email>",
      "task_list_id": "<task_list_id>",
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "update_task_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user_google_email`	Yes
`task_list_id`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`dry_run`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.10Jun 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as whether the update is partial or full, authorization needs, or effects on other data. The dry_run parameter is mentioned but no further 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 concise with a single sentence for purpose followed by parameter details, though the Args section could be slightly more streamlined.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and detailed parameter descriptions, the description is mostly complete but lacks information on error handling or behavior under edge cases.

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?

The docstring explains each parameter including user_google_email, task_list_id, title, and dry_run, adding meaning beyond the schema which has 0% description coverage.

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 'Update an existing task list', which is a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like create_task_list and delete_task_list.

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, nor are there any exclusions or context for selection.

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

Deploy Server