Skip to main content
Glama
tom275275

Google Workspace MCP Server

by tom275275
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

update_paragraph_style

Format paragraphs in Google Docs by applying heading styles, bulleted or numbered lists, alignment, spacing, and indentation to a selected range.

Instructions

Apply paragraph-level formatting, heading styles, and/or list formatting to a range in a Google Doc.

This tool can apply named heading styles (H1-H6) for semantic document structure, create bulleted or numbered lists with nested indentation, and customize paragraph properties like alignment, spacing, and indentation. All operations can be applied in a single call.

Args: user_google_email: User's Google email address document_id: Document ID to modify start_index: Start position (1-based) end_index: End position (exclusive) - should cover the entire paragraph heading_level: Heading level 0-6 (0 = NORMAL_TEXT, 1 = H1, 2 = H2, etc.) Use for semantic document structure alignment: Text alignment - 'START' (left), 'CENTER', 'END' (right), or 'JUSTIFIED' line_spacing: Line spacing multiplier (1.0 = single, 1.5 = 1.5x, 2.0 = double) indent_first_line: First line indent in points (e.g., 36 for 0.5 inch) indent_start: Left/start indent in points indent_end: Right/end indent in points space_above: Space above paragraph in points (e.g., 12 for one line) space_below: Space below paragraph in points list_type: Create a list from existing paragraphs ('UNORDERED' for bullets, 'ORDERED' for numbers) list_nesting_level: Nesting level for lists (0-8, where 0 is top level, default is 0) Use higher levels for nested/indented list items

Returns: str: Confirmation message with formatting details

Examples: # Apply H1 heading style update_paragraph_style(document_id="...", start_index=1, end_index=20, heading_level=1)

# Create a bulleted list
update_paragraph_style(document_id="...", start_index=1, end_index=50,
                       list_type="UNORDERED")

# Create a nested numbered list item
update_paragraph_style(document_id="...", start_index=1, end_index=30,
                       list_type="ORDERED", list_nesting_level=1)

# Apply H2 heading with custom spacing
update_paragraph_style(document_id="...", start_index=1, end_index=30,
                       heading_level=2, space_above=18, space_below=12)

# Center-align a paragraph with double spacing
update_paragraph_style(document_id="...", start_index=1, end_index=50,
                       alignment="CENTER", line_spacing=2.0)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
alignmentNo
end_indexYes
list_typeNo
indent_endNo
document_idYes
space_aboveNo
space_belowNo
start_indexYes
indent_startNo
line_spacingNo
heading_levelNo
indent_first_lineNo
user_google_emailYes
list_nesting_levelNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.14.3

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It provides useful behavior details: end_index is exclusive, heading_level 0 maps to NORMAL_TEXT, lists are created from existing paragraphs, and the return is a confirmation message. However, it does not disclose side effects like overwriting existing paragraph formatting, required permissions, or failure behavior.

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 well-structured with clear sections: overview, Args, Returns, and Examples. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides necessary detail for 14 parameters. The five examples are helpful but slightly redundant; a couple of representative examples would have been enough.

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?

For a complex 14-parameter tool with no schema-level parameter descriptions and no annotations, the description is highly complete: it documents every parameter, provides defaults, gives return behavior, and shows usage patterns. It falls slightly short only in missing explicit usage boundaries versus doc-related sibling tools and in not stating side effects or permission requirements.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. Every parameter is explained with units, ranges, defaults, and contextual meaning—for example, line_spacing multipliers, indent values in points, list_nesting_level 0-8, and the mapping for heading_level. The varied examples further clarify parameter combinations.

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?

Clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Apply paragraph-level formatting, heading styles, and/or list formatting to a range in a Google Doc.' The description distinguishes the tool's focus from generic text editing and element insertion, though it does not explicitly name or contrast sibling tools like modify_doc_text or batch_update_doc.

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 when to use the tool through capabilities and examples, such as applying H1 headings, creating bulleted lists, and adjusting spacing. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when NOT to use it or which sibling tool to choose instead, so an agent must infer the boundary from context.

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