Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
google-workspace-mcp

google-workspace-mcp

by smk-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

contact_groups_list

Lists a Google account's contact groups, such as Family or Work, so you can map them to CRM tags or circles.

Instructions

List the account's contact groups — Google's native labels/segments (e.g. 'Family', 'Work'). These map cleanly to CRM tags/circles.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "account": "<account>"
    },
    "name": "contact_groups_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountYes
page_sizeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.2

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about pagination behavior, rate limits, ordering, what a group object contains, or whether the account requires auth. Only the CRM-tags/circles framing adds context beyond the name.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and free of padding. The second sentence about CRM tags/circles is useful framing rather than filler.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: an agent knows it lists contact groups for an account. However, with pagination and the account identifier undocumented, an agent lacks what it needs to call the tool correctly beyond a guess.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies the result is scoped to an "account" but never explains the account identifier format, and the page_size parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving both parameters undefined in prose.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List the account's contact groups") and clarifies what these objects are with examples ('Family', 'Work'). It implicitly separates them from sibling label tools by calling them contact groups, though the phrase "Google's native labels/segments" risks blurring the line with gmail_labels_list.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative (e.g., contact_group_get for one group, gmail_labels_list for mail labels). A listing verb makes basic intent inferable, but the description leaves selection between siblings entirely to the agent.

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