Skip to main content
Glama
ZatesloFL

Google Workspace MCP Server

by ZatesloFL

create_form

Generate and customize Google Forms using a user's Google email, form title, optional description, and document title. Returns form ID and edit URL for quick access and management.

Instructions

Create a new form using the title given in the provided form message in the request.

Args: user_google_email (str): The user's Google email address. Required. title (str): The title of the form. description (Optional[str]): The description of the form. document_title (Optional[str]): The document title (shown in browser tab).

Returns: str: Confirmation message with form ID and edit URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
descriptionNo
document_titleNo
titleYes
user_google_emailYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'create_form' tool. It creates a new Google Form using the Google Forms API with the provided title, optional description, and document title. Returns a confirmation message with the form ID and URLs. Registered via @server.tool() decorator.
    @server.tool()
    @handle_http_errors("create_form", service_type="forms")
    @require_google_service("forms", "forms")
    async def create_form(
        service,
        user_google_email: str,
        title: str,
        description: Optional[str] = None,
        document_title: Optional[str] = None
    ) -> str:
        """
        Create a new form using the title given in the provided form message in the request.
    
        Args:
            user_google_email (str): The user's Google email address. Required.
            title (str): The title of the form.
            description (Optional[str]): The description of the form.
            document_title (Optional[str]): The document title (shown in browser tab).
    
        Returns:
            str: Confirmation message with form ID and edit URL.
        """
        logger.info(f"[create_form] Invoked. Email: '{user_google_email}', Title: {title}")
    
        form_body: Dict[str, Any] = {
            "info": {
                "title": title
            }
        }
    
        if description:
            form_body["info"]["description"] = description
    
        if document_title:
            form_body["info"]["document_title"] = document_title
    
        created_form = await asyncio.to_thread(
            service.forms().create(body=form_body).execute
        )
    
        form_id = created_form.get("formId")
        edit_url = f"https://docs.google.com/forms/d/{form_id}/edit"
        responder_url = created_form.get("responderUri", f"https://docs.google.com/forms/d/{form_id}/viewform")
    
        confirmation_message = f"Successfully created form '{created_form.get('info', {}).get('title', title)}' for {user_google_email}. Form ID: {form_id}. Edit URL: {edit_url}. Responder URL: {responder_url}"
        logger.info(f"Form created successfully for {user_google_email}. ID: {form_id}")
        return confirmation_message
  • Registers the create_form tool with the MCP server using the @server.tool() decorator.
    @server.tool()
  • Input schema defined by function parameters: user_google_email (str, required), title (str, required), description (str, optional), document_title (str, optional). Returns str.
    async def create_form(
        service,
        user_google_email: str,
        title: str,
        description: Optional[str] = None,
        document_title: Optional[str] = None
    ) -> str:
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates a new form and returns a confirmation message with form ID and edit URL, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions (e.g., whether the user needs specific Google Forms access), error handling, or rate limits. The description doesn't contradict annotations (none provided), but it's incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 well-structured and concise, with three clear sections: purpose statement, parameter details, and return value. Each sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy. It's front-loaded with the main action and efficiently covers key aspects in minimal text.

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 tool's complexity (a mutation with 4 parameters), no annotations, and an output schema present (which covers return values), the description is reasonably complete. It explains the purpose, parameters, and return value, compensating for the lack of annotations. However, it could improve by adding more behavioral context (e.g., auth needs) and usage guidelines, making it slightly incomplete for optimal agent use.

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 description includes an 'Args' section that lists all four parameters (user_google_email, title, description, document_title) with brief explanations, adding meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It clarifies that user_google_email is required and distinguishes optional parameters. However, it doesn't provide examples, constraints, or format details (e.g., email validation), leaving some gaps.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Create a new form using the title given in the provided form message in the request.' It specifies the verb ('Create') and resource ('a new form'), making the action explicit. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'create_doc' or 'create_spreadsheet' beyond mentioning 'form', which is somewhat implied by the tool name itself.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., Google Forms access), exclusions, or compare it to similar tools like 'create_doc' or 'create_spreadsheet'. The only implied context is creating forms, but no explicit usage instructions are given.

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/ZatesloFL/google_workspace_mcp'

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