Skip to main content
Glama
jie8357IOII

google-my-business-mcp

by jie8357IOII

gmb_info_locations_updateattributes

Idempotent

Update attributes for a specified Google Business Profile location. Provide the location ID and attribute mask to modify or delete attributes via the Google My Business API.

Instructions

PATCH v1/{+name}. Update attributes for a given location.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoJSON request body for this Google API method.
nameYesRequired. Google identifier for this location in the form of `locations/{location_id}/attributes`.
fieldsNoSelector specifying which fields to include in a partial response.
$.xgafvNoV1 error format.
quotaUserNoAvailable to use for quota purposes for server-side applications. Can be any arbitrary string assigned to a user, but should not exceed 40 characters.
prettyPrintNoReturns response with indentations and line breaks.
attributeMaskNoRequired. Attribute name of attributes that you'd like to update. Represented by `attributes/{attribute}`. Updates: All attributes provided in the attributes field that you would like to update must be set in the `attribute_mask`. Attributes set in the above list but not in the `attribute_mask` will be ignored. Deletes: If you'd like to delete certain attributes, they must be specified in the `attribute_mask` with no matching entry in the attributes list. If you'd like to delete all attributes set on a location, you should look up all the applicable attributes for the location and then add them to the `attribute_mask` with an empty attributes field.
Behavior2/5

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

The description simply restates the operation name and adds the HTTP method. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description contributes no additional behavioral context such as the requirement for attributeMask, partial update semantics, or deletion behavior, which are covered only in the schema.

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?

The description is extremely short but front-loaded. However, it is under-sized for the complexity of the tool; a one-liner omits critical usage details like the role of attributeMask. While there is no wasted wording, the brevity is not appropriately sized for this operation.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has 7 parameters, nested objects, and complex mask-based update logic, yet the description provides only the most basic idea. It fails to mention partial update behavior, required fields, or how to delete attributes. Since there is no output schema, the description should provide more context for correct invocation, but it does not.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all parameters (e.g., attributeMask includes extensive update/delete logic). The description adds no parameter information, so baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully compensates.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('attributes for a given location'), making it distinct from sibling tools like gmb_info_locations_getattributes (read) and gmb_info_locations_patch (update location details). The restatement is precise and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related tools, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate. Given the number of sibling update tools, this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jie8357IOII/google-my-business-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server