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

List Task Lists

list_task_lists

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all Google Tasks task lists for a user, with pagination and max results options to control output.

Instructions

List all task lists for the user.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page_token`	No	Token for pagination.
`max_results`	No	Maximum number of task lists to return (default: 1000, max: 1000).
`user_google_email`	Yes	The user's Google email address. Required.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.28.0Sep 24, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / page_token / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / page_token / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
Addedv1.0.1Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds minor scope context ('all task lists for the user') but does not disclose pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or any other operational traits beyond the annotations.

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 redundant wording. It communicates the action and object efficiently while leaving operational details to the schema and annotations.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple read-only list operation, the description is sufficient when combined with full schema parameter docs and supporting annotations. The output schema exists, so return values are not the description's responsibility, and no critical operational context is missing.

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%, with each parameter already documented inline. The description adds no additional meaning about page_token, max_results, or user_google_email, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), resource ('task lists'), and scope ('all' and 'for the user'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_tasks (which lists tasks inside lists) and get_task_list (which retrieves a single list), even without naming them.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_task_list, list_tasks, or manage_task_list. The agent must rely entirely on sibling names and context to decide, since no exclusions or conditions are provided.

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

Deploy Server