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

google-workspace-mcp

by smk-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

drive_search

Search and list Google Drive files with Drive query syntax to filter by name, MIME type, parent folder, or other attributes for a specified account.

Instructions

List/search files. query uses Drive query language; see https://developers.google.com/drive/api/guides/search-files Examples: "name contains 'budget'" "mimeType='application/vnd.google-apps.folder'" "'' in parents"

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": "drive_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNo
accountYes
order_byNomodifiedTime desc
max_resultsNo
include_trashedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.2

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description indicates it is a non-destructive search operation, but it does not mention pagination, rate limits, or the fact that it only searches the specified account's files. Without annotations, more clarity on read-only behavior and scope would be beneficial.

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 description is short and front-loaded with the action, but the inclusion of a URL and multiple examples makes it slightly less efficient. It could be more compact while retaining essential information.

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?

Given five parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks explanation of the account parameter, return format, and default behavior details, which are necessary for effective use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only addresses the 'query' parameter with examples. The other four parameters (account, max_results, order_by, include_trashed) are not explained, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 starts with 'List/search files,' which clearly indicates the action and resource. It provides specific examples of query syntax, distinguishing it from sibling tools like drive_file_get or drive_file_download that operate on individual files.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for file listing/searching but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use drive_file_get for a specific file). No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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