grr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

chat.users.sections.create

Creates a custom section in Google Chat to group conversations and customize the spaces shown in the navigation panel.

Instructions

Creates a section in Google Chat. Sections help users group conversations and customize the list of spaces displayed in Chat navigation panel. Only sections of type CUSTOM_SECTION can be created. For details, see Create and organize sections in Google Chat. Requires user authentication with the authorization scope: - https://www.googleapis.com/auth/chat.users.sections [HTTP POST] — creates or triggers a change; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON GoogleChatV1Section object accepting displayName, name, sortOrder, type; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: delete, list, patch, position.

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.
`parent`	Yes	[URL path segment] Required. The parent resource name where the section is created. Format: `users/{user}`
`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 GoogleChatV1Section object.
`request_body`	No	Request body of type GoogleChatV1Section: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`type`	No
`sortOrder`	No
`displayName`	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 GoogleChatV1Section object."

addedInput schema / properties / request_body

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type GoogleChatV1Section: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "displayName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sortOrder": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "enum": [
+        "SECTION_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "CUSTOM_SECTION",
+        "DEFAULT_DIRECT_MESSAGES",
+        "DEFAULT_SPACES",
+        "DEFAULT_APPS"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / parent / description

Previous value: -"Required. The parent resource name where the section is created. Format: `users/{user}`"New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The parent resource name where the section is created. Format: `users/{user}`"

addedInput schema / properties / parent / pattern
```
Added value: +"^users/[^/]+$"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "displayName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sortOrder": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "enum": [
+        "SECTION_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "CUSTOM_SECTION",
+        "DEFAULT_DIRECT_MESSAGES",
+        "DEFAULT_SPACES",
+        "DEFAULT_APPS"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does well: it discloses the required user-authentication scope, the HTTP POST mutation semantics, that the operation is refused under --readonly safety profiles, and the response shape. It stops short of stating duplicate-name behavior or any per-user section limits.

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 CUSTOM_SECTION constraint are front-loaded, and the auth/post/return details follow in a logical order. The auth and scope links plus the readonly note add bulk, though for an unannotated mutation tool that bulk is largely earning its place.

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?

Covers the hard parts for a create tool: auth scope, mutation semantics, readonly refusal, body fields, and sibling context; an output schema exists so return values need not be explained further. The remaining gap is that it never says which body fields (displayName?) are required versus optional.

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 schema already documents parent, request_body, params, body_file and dry_run, making 3 the baseline. The description does add one genuine semantic constraint absent from the schema — that the type enum must be CUSTOM_SECTION in practice — which lifts it slightly but not to a full 4.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Creates a section in Google Chat') and immediately explains what a section is and where it appears. The closing clause names the sibling operations over the same resource (delete, list, patch, position), so an agent can place it precisely among the alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a real selection constraint — only sections of type CUSTOM_SECTION can be created — which prevents a class of wrong calls. It also lists siblings, but only nominatively; it doesn't explicitly say when to reach for patch or position instead of create.

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

Deploy Server