grr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

drive.approvals.cancel

Cancel an in-progress Google Drive approval and set its status to CANCELLED, allowing file writers to stop a pending review before it completes.

Instructions

Cancels an approval. For more information, see Manage approvals. Updates the approval Status to CANCELLED. This can be called by any user with the writer permission on the file while the approval Status is IN_PROGRESS [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 CancelApprovalRequest object accepting message; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: approve, comment, decline, get, list, reassign, start.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	No	Extra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
`fileId`	Yes	[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the file that the approval is on.
`params`	No	Parameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
`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 CancelApprovalRequest object.
`approvalId`	Yes	[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the approval to cancel.
`request_body`	No	Request body of type CancelApprovalRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	No
`status`	No
`dueTime`	No
`initiator`	No
`approvalId`	No
`createTime`	No
`modifyTime`	No
`completeTime`	No
`targetFileId`	No
`reviewerResponses`	No
`fileContentChangeBehavior`	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 CancelApprovalRequest object."

addedInput schema / properties / request_body

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type CancelApprovalRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / approvalId / description

Previous value: -"Required. The ID of the approval to cancel."New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the approval to cancel."

changedInput schema / properties / fileId / description

Previous value: -"Required. The ID of the file that the approval is on."New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the file that the approval is on."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "approvalId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "completeTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "createTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "dueTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "fileContentChangeBehavior": {
+      "enum": [
+        "FILE_CONTENT_CHANGE_BEHAVIOR_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "RESET_APPROVAL",
+        "NO_APPROVAL_ACTION"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "initiator": {
+      "properties": {
+        "displayName": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "emailAddress": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "kind": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "me": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "permissionId": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "photoLink": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "modifyTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "reviewerResponses": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "kind": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "response": {
+            "enum": [
+              "RESPONSE_UNSPECIFIED",
+              "NO_RESPONSE",
+              "APPROVED",
+              "DECLINED"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "reviewer": {
+            "properties": {
+              "displayName": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "emailAddress": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "kind": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "me": {
+                "type": "boolean"
+              },
+              "permissionId": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "photoLink": {
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "STATUS_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "IN_PROGRESS",
+        "APPROVED",
+        "CANCELLED",
+        "DECLINED"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "targetFileId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

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 mostly delivers: HTTP verb, authorization level, state precondition, and the fact that it is refused under `--readonly` safety profiles. It stops short of saying whether cancellation is reversible or whether approvers are notified, which matters for a mutation.

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 core verb and effect lead, and the constraints follow logically; every clause carries information. It is somewhat dense — a doc link, an HTTP verb tag, and a safety-profile note crammed into one run-on stretch — which costs a bit of readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation on a nested resource with an output schema present, the definition covers permission, precondition, safety refusal, and body-passing mechanics — everything an agent needs to call it correctly without guessing.

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 `fileId`, `approvalId`, `params`, `body_file`, and the `message` field are already documented in the schema. The description more or less restates that plumbing (body via `params` or `body_file`) without adding format or semantics beyond it, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 ("Cancels an approval") and pins down the exact state transition (Status to `CANCELLED`), so the effect is unambiguous. It also enumerates the sibling operations over the same resource, letting an agent distinguish cancel from approve/decline/get without opening a schema.

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 concrete preconditions: caller needs `writer` permission and the approval must be `IN_PROGRESS`. It lists siblings as alternatives but does not explicitly state when to prefer `decline` over `cancel`, so the routing guidance is implied rather than fully spelled out.

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

Deploy Server