Skip to main content
Glama

Run Script Function

run_script_function
Destructive

Execute a specific function in a deployed Google Apps Script project, with optional parameters and the ability to run the latest code instead of the deployed version.

Instructions

Executes a function in a deployed script.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_google_emailYesUser's email address
script_idYesThe script project ID
function_nameYesName of function to execute
parametersNoOptional list of parameters to pass
dev_modeNoWhether to run latest code vs deployed version

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context (e.g., side effects, permissions, execution environment). It does not explain the dev_mode parameter's impact or that the function runs in the script's authorization context.

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?

Extremely concise at 8 words, but it borders on under-specification for a tool that executes arbitrary code. Could include a brief note on deployment or dev_mode without significant bloat.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description omits critical context: the function must be deployed (unless dev_mode=true), what happens on error, and that the script must have been granted necessary permissions. The dev_mode parameter is not explained, leaving the agent uncertain about when to set it.

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 100% and descriptions in schema are adequate. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Executes a function in a deployed script' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like listing or getting script content. It is precise and unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other script manipulation tools). No mention of prerequisites like the script must be deployed or the function must exist. The description is purely operational.

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/chadvdwww-hash/worksuite-mcp'

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