Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

gmail.users.settings.updatePop

Updates Gmail POP settings for a user, letting you configure the access window and how downloaded messages are handled (leave in inbox, archive, trash, or mark as read).

Instructions

Updates POP settings. For more information, see Configure POP and IMAP settings with the Gmail API [HTTP PUT] — updates the resource; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON PopSettings object accepting accessWindow, disposition; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: getAutoForwarding, getImap, getLanguage, getPop, getVacation, updateAutoForwarding, updateImap, updateLanguage, updateVacation.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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] 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 PopSettings object.
request_bodyNoRequest body of type PopSettings: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dispositionNo
accessWindowNo

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 PopSettings object."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_body
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type PopSettings: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "accessWindow": {
+      "enum": [
+        "accessWindowUnspecified",
+        "disabled",
+        "fromNowOn",
+        "allMail"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "disposition": {
+      "enum": [
+        "dispositionUnspecified",
+        "leaveInInbox",
+        "archive",
+        "trash",
+        "markRead"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / userId / default
      Added value: +"me"
    • changedInput schema / properties / userId / description
      Previous value: -"User's email address. The special value \"me\" can be used to indicate the authenticated user."New value: +"[URL path segment] User's email address. The special value \"me\" can be used to indicate the authenticated user."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "accessWindow": {
+      "enum": [
+        "accessWindowUnspecified",
+        "disabled",
+        "fromNowOn",
+        "allMail"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "disposition": {
+      "enum": [
+        "dispositionUnspecified",
+        "leaveInInbox",
+        "archive",
+        "trash",
+        "markRead"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the HTTP PUT semantics, that the call is refused under --readonly safety profiles, and that the API response resource is returned as JSON. It does not explain full-replacement vs partial-update behavior or required scopes, which is a real (if minor) gap for a mutation tool.

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 is front-loaded in the first sentence and there is no filler, but the single paragraph crams the doc link, HTTP verb, safety note, body shape and full sibling list together, making it denser than needed.

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 needn't be explained, and the description still covers mutation semantics, safety-profile refusal and body construction. Combined with a fully documented schema, an agent has nearly everything needed to call it correctly.

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 userId, params, body_file and the nested request_body fields. The description restates accessWindow/disposition and the params-vs-body_file routing, adding only marginal clarity over the schema, which is the baseline 3 case.

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 ("Updates POP settings") and explicitly lists the sibling settings tools (getPop, updateImap, updateLanguage, etc.) over the same resource, letting an agent distinguish it 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?

The sibling list plus the note that mutations are refused under --readonly safety profiles gives clear context on when this tool applies versus the read-only getters. It stops short of an explicit "use this when you need to change disposition/accessWindow, use getPop to read" statement, so no full when/when-not routing.

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