Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

analyticsadmin.accounts.patch

Updates a Google Analytics Admin account by patching specified fields via updateMask and returns the updated account as JSON. Use it to modify account details such as display name or region code.

Instructions

Updates an account [HTTP PATCH] — updates the resource; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaAccount object accepting createTime, deleted, displayName, gmpOrganization, name, regionCode, updateTime; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: delete, get, getDataSharingSettings, list, provisionAccountTicket, runAccessReport, searchChangeHistoryEvents.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes[URL path segment] Identifier. Resource name of this account. Format: accounts/{account} Example: "accounts/100"
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaAccount object.
updateMaskNo[query parameter] Required. The list of fields to be updated. Field names must be in snake case (for example, "field_to_update"). Omitted fields will not be updated. To replace t
request_bodyNoRequest body of type GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaAccount: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
deletedNo
createTimeNo
regionCodeNo
updateTimeNo
displayNameNo
gmpOrganizationNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / body_file / description
      Previous value: -"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters."New value: +"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaAccount object."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_body
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaAccount: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "createTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "deleted": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "displayName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "gmpOrganization": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "regionCode": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updateTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Identifier. Resource name of this account. Format: accounts/{account} Example: \"accounts/100\""New value: +"[URL path segment] Identifier. Resource name of this account. Format: accounts/{account} Example: \"accounts/100\""
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^accounts/[^/]+$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / updateMask / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The list of fields to be updated. Field names must be in snake case (for example, \"field_to_update\"). Omitted fields will not be updated. To replace t"New value: +"[query parameter] Required. The list of fields to be updated. Field names must be in snake case (for example, \"field_to_update\"). Omitted fields will not be updated. To replace t"
    • addedInput schema / properties / updateMask / format
      Added value: +"google-fieldmask"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "createTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "deleted": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "displayName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "gmpOrganization": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "regionCode": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updateTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it reveals PATCH semantics, the runtime safety-profile constraint (refused under --readonly), and the return shape (response resource as JSON). It doesn't discuss permissions or partial-vs-full replacement behavior, but the safety constraint is valuable non-obvious 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?

Purpose and the safety constraint are front-loaded in a compact form. The redundant 'updates the resource' restatement and the long sibling enumeration are slightly wasteful but don't obscure the message.

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?

The tool is complete enough: mutation semantics, safety constraint, body construction, and return form are all conveyed, and an output schema exists. Minor gap is the absence of guidance on updateMask behavior (partial update) versus the body, but nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter including the request_body fields and updateMask. The description restates the body's accepted fields and the params/body_file routing, adding only modest guidance 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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Updates an account [HTTP PATCH]' and even clarifies the patch semantics. It lists the sibling operations over the same resource, though it doesn't spell out the semantic distinction (e.g., patch vs update). An agent can still clearly identify what this tool does.

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 discloses a key usage constraint — 'refused under --readonly safety profiles' — which tells the agent when the call will fail. However, it only names the sibling list without explaining when to choose patch over delete/get/list, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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