Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

forms.forms.watches.renew

Renew a Google Forms watch to extend its active period by seven days, reset its expiry, and restore suspended watches when the underlying error is resolved.

Instructions

Renew an existing watch for seven days. The state of the watch after renewal is ACTIVE, and the expire_time is seven days from the renewal. Renewing a watch in an error state (e.g. SUSPENDED) succeeds if the error is no longer present, but fail otherwise. After a watch has expired, RenewWatch returns NOT_FOUND [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 RenewWatchRequest object; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, delete, list.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
formIdYes[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the Form.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
watchIdYes[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the Watch to renew.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON RenewWatchRequest object.
request_bodyNoRequest body of type RenewWatchRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
stateNo
targetNo
errorTypeNo
eventTypeNo
createTimeNo
expireTimeNo

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 RenewWatchRequest object."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_body
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type RenewWatchRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / formId / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The ID of the Form."New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the Form."
    • changedInput schema / properties / watchId / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The ID of the Watch to renew."New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The ID of the Watch to renew."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "createTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "errorType": {
+      "enum": [
+        "ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "PROJECT_NOT_AUTHORIZED",
+        "NO_USER_ACCESS",
+        "OTHER_ERRORS"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "eventType": {
+      "enum": [
+        "EVENT_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "SCHEMA",
+        "RESPONSES"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "expireTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "state": {
+      "enum": [
+        "STATE_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "ACTIVE",
+        "SUSPENDED"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "target": {
+      "properties": {
+        "topic": {
+          "properties": {
+            "topicName": {
+              "type": "string"
+            }
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden well: it discloses post-renewal state ACTIVE, the seven-day expire_time, behavior in SUSPENDED/error states, NOT_FOUND after expiry, and refusal under --readonly safety profiles. It also describes the HTTP POST effect and that it returns the API response resource as JSON.

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 key purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and most follow-on details are behaviorally useful. The final sentence is a run-on that mixes return format, request-body transport, and sibling names, and some request-body details repeat the schema.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, the description supplies the necessary behavioral context: state after renewal, expiry semantics, error-state handling, expired-watch NOT_FOUND behavior, and readonly safety refusal. An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values further.

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 all seven parameters. The description reinforces that the request body is a RenewWatchRequest and may be passed via params or body_file, but it does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description uses a specific verb+resource: renew an existing watch. It also names sibling operations over the same resource (create, delete, list), so an agent can distinguish this tool without opening other schemas.

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?

It clearly frames usage around an existing watch and explains behavior for error-state and expired watches, including NOT_FOUND after expiry. It lists siblings but does not explicitly spell out when to choose create vs delete vs renew in every scenario.

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