Skip to main content
Glama
iTvX

Google Workspace MCP — Gmail edition

by iTvX

manage_docs

Read, create, append, insert, and find-replace text in Google Docs documents across Google accounts. Use it to inspect content or make targeted edits by document ID, tab, and character index.

Instructions

Read, write, insert, and find-replace text in Google Docs documents.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNoText to write (plain text) — appended to the end by write, inserted at `index` by insertText
emailYesAccount email address. On list operations, "all" runs it once for every configured account.
indexNoCharacter index to insert at (1 = start of the tab's body)
tabIdNoTab to act on — a tabId from a previous get's tabIndex. Scopes the read on get; targets the edit on write/insertText/replaceText, which act on the FIRST tab when it is omitted (replaceText spans every tab). Character indices are per-tab.
titleNoDocument title (default: 'Untitled document')
findTextNoText to find
matchCaseNoCase-sensitive match (default: true)
operationYesget: get document content and metadata | create: create a new document | write: append text to the end of a document | insertText: insert text at a specific position in a document | replaceText: find and replace text in a document
documentIdNoDocument ID
replaceWithNoReplacement text

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv4.8.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verbs 'write', 'insert', and 'replace' imply mutation, but the description does not disclose destructive potential, permission requirements, tab-scoping behavior, or what gets overwritten. The schema descriptions add some behavioral detail, but the description itself adds none.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a high-level tool summary.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 10-parameter, multi-operation tool with no output schema, the one-sentence description is thin and omits the 'create' operation entirely. The rich schema prevents total ambiguity, but the description does not fully convey the tool's scope or behavior.

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 10 parameters and the operation enum. The description adds only a high-level restatement of operations and does not clarify index semantics, tabId scoping, matchCase defaults, or other parameter-level behavior.

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 uses specific verbs (read, write, insert, find-replace) and names the resource (Google Docs documents), which distinguishes it from siblings like manage_sheets and manage_drive. However, it omits the 'create' operation that the schema lists, so the full scope is not stated.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no named alternatives. The description does not tell an agent when to choose this tool over manage_drive for document files or when a different operation is preferred.

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