Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

chat.users.sections.patch

Update a custom Google Chat section, such as its display name, using a required update mask; system sections cannot be changed. Requires user authentication.

Instructions

Updates a section. Only sections of type CUSTOM_SECTION can be updated. 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 PATCH] — updates the resource; 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: create, delete, list, position.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes[URL path segment] Identifier. Resource name of the section. For system sections, the section ID is a constant string: - DEFAULT_DIRECT_MESSAGES: `users/{user}/sections/default-di
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 GoogleChatV1Section object.
updateMaskNo[query parameter] Required. The mask to specify which fields to update. Currently supported field paths: - `display_name`
request_bodyNoRequest body of type GoogleChatV1Section: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
typeNo
sortOrderNo
displayNameNo

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 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"
+}
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Identifier. Resource name of the section. For system sections, the section ID is a constant string: - DEFAULT_DIRECT_MESSAGES: `users/{user}/sections/default-di"New value: +"[URL path segment] Identifier. Resource name of the section. For system sections, the section ID is a constant string: - DEFAULT_DIRECT_MESSAGES: `users/{user}/sections/default-di"
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^users/[^/]+/sections/[^/]+$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / updateMask / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The mask to specify which fields to update. Currently supported field paths: - `display_name`"New value: +"[query parameter] Required. The mask to specify which fields to update. Currently supported field paths: - `display_name`"
    • addedInput schema / properties / updateMask / format
      Added value: +"google-fieldmask"
    • 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"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the HTTP PATCH semantics, the required user-auth scope, that the call is 'refused under --readonly safety profiles', and that the response is the API resource as JSON. It does not state whether the operation is idempotent or what happens to fields omitted from the mask, keeping it short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core statement and constraint are correctly front-loaded, but the rest is a dense run-on paragraph mixing long auth URLs, scope strings, and a trailing sibling list with no structural breaks. Every element is relevant, yet the formatting makes it harder to scan than it needs to be.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained, and the description still covers auth, scope, read-only refusal, and body construction. For a spec-style PATCH tool this is close to complete; only mutation edge cases (untouched fields, mask interaction) are left implicit in the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the body's accepted fields (displayName, name, sortOrder, type), the `params` vs `body_file` routing, and the constraint tying `type` to CUSTOM_SECTION. That enriches the `type` and body parameters beyond their schema text.

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 ('Updates') and resource ('a section') and adds a decisive scope constraint: only `CUSTOM_SECTION` sections can be updated. It also names the sibling operations over the same resource (create, delete, list, position), so the agent can place it in the family, though it doesn't contrast conditions as sharply as naming a single alternative would.

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?

Explicitly states the eligibility precondition (only `CUSTOM_SECTION` type) and the authentication/scope requirement, which is the main gate an agent must check before calling. Sibling names are listed as alternatives, but there is no explicit 'use X instead when…' clause.

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