Skip to main content
Glama
taylorwilsdon

Google Workspace MCP Server - Control Gmail, Calendar, Docs, Sheets, Slides, Chat, Forms & Drive

by taylorwilsdon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Get Script Project

get_script_project
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch Apps Script project details and source files by script ID, or list projects with pagination for review.

Instructions

Read Apps Script projects and their source files.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesOne of "list", "get".
file_nameNoOptional source file name for get.
page_sizeNoNumber of results per page for list (default: 50).
script_idNoThe script project ID (required for get).
page_tokenNoPagination token for list (optional).
user_google_emailYesUser's email address

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changedv1.28.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / action
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "One of \"list\", \"get\".",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / file_name
      Added value: +{
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Optional source file name for get.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / page_size
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 50,
+  "description": "Number of results per page for list (default: 50).",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / page_token
      Added value: +{
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Pagination token for list (optional).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / script_id / default
      Added value: +null
    • changedInput schema / properties / script_id / description
      Previous value: -"The script project ID"New value: +"The script project ID (required for get)."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "user_google_email",
-  "script_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "user_google_email",
+  "action"
+]
  2. Addedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover safety: readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description simply restates the read nature and adds the 'source files' scope, but it does not add contextual behavior such as mode differences (list vs get) or pagination; this is acceptable because annotations carry the safety burden.

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 that states the core operation without filler. Every word contributes to selection.

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?

Given the 100% schema coverage, robust annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It is brief but would benefit from explicitly noting the list-versus-get action modes or pointing to manage_script_content for edits; still, it provides enough context to select correctly.

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 every parameter including action, script_id, file_name, page_size, and page_token is already documented. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which meets the high-coverage baseline.

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 uses the specific verb 'Read' with a clear resource scope, 'Apps Script projects and their source files.' This directly differentiates it from sibling tools like manage_script_project, get_script_version, and get_script_activity, which concern different resources or operations.

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 read-oriented wording implies it should be used when an agent needs to inspect Apps Script projects or files, but the description offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives such as manage_script_content or get_script_activity.

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