Skip to main content
Glama

gmail.users.labels.patch

Update specific fields of a Gmail label, such as name, color, or visibility, without replacing the entire label. Use this to change label properties while preserving other settings.

Instructions

Patch the specified label. For more information, see Manage labels [HTTP PATCH] — updates the resource; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON Label object accepting color, id, labelListVisibility, messageListVisibility, messagesTotal, messagesUnread, name, threadsTotal and 2 more fields; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, delete, get, list, update.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes[URL path segment] The ID of the label to update.
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
userIdYes[URL path segment] The user's email address. The special value `me` can be used to indicate the authenticated user.me
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 Label object.
request_bodyNoRequest body of type Label: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
nameNo
typeNo
colorNo
threadsTotalNo
messagesTotalNo
threadsUnreadNo
messagesUnreadNo
labelListVisibilityNo
messageListVisibilityNo

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 Label object."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_body
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Request body of type Label: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "color": {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "backgroundColor": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "textColor": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "id": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "labelListVisibility": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "labelShow",
      +        "labelShowIfUnread",
      +        "labelHide"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "messageListVisibility": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "show",
      +        "hide"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "messagesTotal": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "messagesUnread": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "name": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "threadsTotal": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "threadsUnread": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "type": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "system",
      +        "user"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"The ID of the label to update."New value: +"[URL path segment] The ID of the label to update."
    • addedInput schema / properties / userId / default
      Added value: +"me"
    • changedInput schema / properties / userId / description
      Previous value: -"The user's email address. The special value `me` can be used to indicate the authenticated user."New value: +"[URL path segment] The user's email address. The special value `me` can be used to indicate the authenticated user."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "color": {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "backgroundColor": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "textColor": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "id": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "labelListVisibility": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "labelShow",
      +        "labelShowIfUnread",
      +        "labelHide"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "messageListVisibility": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "show",
      +        "hide"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "messagesTotal": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "messagesUnread": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "name": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "threadsTotal": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "threadsUnread": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "type": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "system",
      +        "user"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
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 it delivers: it declares the operation mutates the resource, that it is blocked under readonly safety profiles, and that the response is the API's Label resource as JSON. It omits permission/auth requirements and what happens to fields not included in the patch, but the core behavioral profile is disclosed.

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?

Purpose and sibling routing are front-loaded, but the middle is a dense run-on that enumerates body fields already present in the schema ('and 2 more fields'), which is wasted text. Length is defensible for a mutation tool but not tight.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers safety-profile refusal, body construction paths, and return shape, which is most of what an agent needs. The patch-vs-update distinction and any permission requirements are the remaining gaps.

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 the schema already documents every parameter and the nested Label body. The description restates the body field list and the params/body_file mechanism, adding no meaning beyond the structured data; baseline 3 applies.

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 (patch) and resource (label), notes the HTTP PATCH method, and enumerates the sibling operations (create, delete, get, list, update). It stops short of explaining how patch semantics differ from update (partial vs. full replacement), which is the one distinction an agent most needs.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives one concrete usage constraint — refused under --readonly safety profiles — but offers no guidance on when to choose patch over update, or any prerequisites. Listing sibling names without selection criteria implies usage rather than stating it.

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