grr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

people.contactGroups.update

Renames an existing contact group owned by the authenticated user, requiring the new name to be unique. Returns HTTP 409 if the name duplicates another group.

Instructions

Update the name of an existing contact group owned by the authenticated user. Updated contact group names must be unique to the users contact groups. Attempting to create a group with a duplicate name will return a HTTP 409 error. Mutate requests for the same user should be sent sequentially to avoid increased latency and failures [HTTP PUT] — updates the resource; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON UpdateContactGroupRequest object accepting contactGroup, readGroupFields, updateGroupFields; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: batchGet, create, delete, get, list.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	No	Extra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
`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 UpdateContactGroupRequest object.
`request_body`	No	Request body of type UpdateContactGroupRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.
`resourceName`	Yes	[URL path segment] The resource name for the contact group, assigned by the server. An ASCII string, in the form of `contactGroups/{contact_group_id}`.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`etag`	No
`name`	No
`metadata`	No
`groupType`	No
`clientData`	No
`memberCount`	No
`resourceName`	No
`formattedName`	No
`memberResourceNames`	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 UpdateContactGroupRequest object."

addedInput schema / properties / request_body

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type UpdateContactGroupRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "contactGroup": {
+      "properties": {
+        "clientData": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "key": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "value": {
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "etag": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "formattedName": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "groupType": {
+          "enum": [
+            "GROUP_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED",
+            "USER_CONTACT_GROUP",
+            "SYSTEM_CONTACT_GROUP"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "memberCount": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "memberResourceNames": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "metadata": {
+          "properties": {
+            "deleted": {
+              "type": "boolean"
+            },
+            "updateTime": {
+              "type": "string"
+            }
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "name": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "resourceName": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "readGroupFields": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updateGroupFields": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / resourceName / description

Previous value: -"The resource name for the contact group, assigned by the server. An ASCII string, in the form of `contactGroups/{contact_group_id}`."New value: +"[URL path segment] The resource name for the contact group, assigned by the server. An ASCII string, in the form of `contactGroups/{contact_group_id}`."

addedInput schema / properties / resourceName / pattern
```
Added value: +"^contactGroups/[^/]+$"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "clientData": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "key": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "etag": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "formattedName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "groupType": {
+      "enum": [
+        "GROUP_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "USER_CONTACT_GROUP",
+        "SYSTEM_CONTACT_GROUP"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "memberCount": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "memberResourceNames": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "metadata": {
+      "properties": {
+        "deleted": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "updateTime": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "resourceName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and does disclose important behavior: HTTP PUT semantics, refusal under readonly safety profiles, duplicate-name 409 behavior, sequential mutation guidance, and JSON response format. It does not cover permission scopes or etag/field-mask side effects, leaving some mutation behavior implicit.

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 purpose and constraints are front-loaded, and most sentences earn their place. However, the single dense paragraph mixes HTTP method, readonly safety, body mechanics, and sibling tools, which makes it less clean than it could 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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers uniqueness, sequential mutation behavior, readonly refusal, response format, and request-body transport, while an output schema exists to cover return structure. It is not fully comprehensive because it omits permission scopes and field-mask effects for readGroupFields/updateGroupFields.

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%, and the schema already documents resourceName, params, body_file, request_body, and nested body fields. The description restates the body type and transport options but adds little semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: update the name of an existing contact group owned by the authenticated user. It also names sibling operations over the same resource, making it easy to distinguish this tool from create, delete, get, list, and batchGet.

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 gives useful usage context: the group must already exist and be owned by the authenticated user, names must be unique, duplicate names return HTTP 409, and mutations for the same user should be sequential. It lists sibling tools but does not explicitly say when to choose update over create/get/delete, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server