grr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

calendar.acl.patch

Update a calendar's access control rule with patch semantics, modifying only specified ACL fields such as role or scope. Use to adjust sharing permissions without replacing the full rule.

Instructions

Updates an access control rule. This method supports patch semantics [HTTP PATCH] — updates the resource; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON AclRule object accepting etag, id, kind, role, scope; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: delete, get, insert, list, update, watch.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	No	Extra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
`params`	No	Parameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
`ruleId`	Yes	[URL path segment] ACL rule identifier.
`dry_run`	No	Return the request that would be sent, without sending it.
`body_file`	No	Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON AclRule object.
`calendarId`	Yes	[URL path segment] Calendar identifier. To retrieve calendar IDs call the calendarList.list method. If you want to access the primary calendar of the currently logged in user, use
`request_body`	No	Request body of type AclRule: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.
`sendNotifications`	No	[query parameter] Whether to send notifications about the calendar sharing change. Note that there are no notifications on access removal. Optional. The default is True.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`etag`	No
`kind`	No
`role`	No
`scope`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

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 AclRule object."

addedInput schema / properties / request_body

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type AclRule: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "etag": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "role": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "scope": {
+      "properties": {
+        "type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "value": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / calendarId / description

Previous value: -"Calendar identifier. To retrieve calendar IDs call the calendarList.list method. If you want to access the primary calendar of the currently logged in user, use"New value: +"[URL path segment] Calendar identifier. To retrieve calendar IDs call the calendarList.list method. If you want to access the primary calendar of the currently logged in user, use"

changedInput schema / properties / ruleId / description

Previous value: -"ACL rule identifier."New value: +"[URL path segment] ACL rule identifier."

changedInput schema / properties / sendNotifications / description

Previous value: -"Whether to send notifications about the calendar sharing change. Note that there are no notifications on access removal. Optional. The default is True."New value: +"[query parameter] Whether to send notifications about the calendar sharing change. Note that there are no notifications on access removal. Optional. The default is True."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "etag": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "role": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "scope": {
+      "properties": {
+        "type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "value": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses mutation via HTTP PATCH, readonly-profile refusal, JSON return behavior, and the request-body shape. It does not cover permission requirements or concurrency/etag implications, but the safety and mutation traits are clearly surfaced.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the paragraph is dense but not excessive for an 8-parameter mutation tool. Some sentences repeat schema details, and the full sibling list is somewhat verbose, but the structure remains usable.

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 mutation nature, nested request body, high schema coverage, and an existing output schema, the definition is largely complete. It covers safety-profile refusal and body-passing mechanics; the main remaining gap is guidance on selecting patch over the closely related update sibling.

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 baseline is 3. The description repeats that the body is an AclRule accepting etag, id, kind, role, scope and can be passed via `params` or `body_file`, which is already documented in the schema rather than adding new parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Updates an access control rule", and adds that it uses PATCH semantics. It also names the sibling ACL operations, but does not explicitly contrast patch vs update, so sibling differentiation is only partial.

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?

It lists sibling tools over the same resource, but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose patch versus update or insert. The only usage constraint supplied is that the method is refused under --readonly safety profiles.

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

Deploy Server