google-appscript-mcp-server

script_projects_deployments_create

Create a new deployment for an existing Google Apps Script project by specifying the script ID, manifest file name, version number, and a description.

Instructions

Creates a deployment of an Apps Script project.

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": {
      "scriptId": "<scriptId>",
      "manifestFileName": "<manifestFileName>",
      "versionNumber": "<versionNumber>",
      "description": "<description>"
    },
    "name": "script_projects_deployments_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scriptId`	Yes	The ID of the script to deploy.
`description`	Yes	A description for the deployment.
`versionNumber`	Yes	The version number of the script.
`manifestFileName`	Yes	The name of the manifest file.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'creates a deployment' without explaining side effects, prerequisites, return values, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a creation 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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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

Completeness1/5

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

This is a create operation with four required parameters and no output schema. The description provides no information about return values, prerequisites, or failure scenarios. An AI agent would struggle to understand what to expect after calling this 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action (creates) and the resource (a deployment of an Apps Script project), distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete or update deployments. It is specific enough, though it lacks scope details like requiring a version or manifest.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, such as the need for an existing version, or when to prefer update or delete. The description simply states the action with no context.

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