fastmcp-gsuite

by tumf

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

rename_drive_file

Rename a file in Google Drive by specifying its file ID and new name.

Instructions

Rename a file in Google Drive.

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": {
      "user_id": "<user_id>",
      "file_id": "<file_id>",
      "new_name": "<new_name>"
    },
    "name": "rename_drive_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`user_id`	Yes	The EMAIL of the Google account. Choose from:
`file_id`	Yes	ID of the file to rename.
`new_name`	Yes	New name for the file.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors, but it only states the basic action. No details on permissions, side effects, or allowed characters for new_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?

Extremely concise single sentence with no fluff, but at the cost of missing useful context.

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 rename tool with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate, but lacks completeness in terms of usage context and behavioral details.

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 covers 100% of parameters with adequate descriptions. The tool description adds no further semantic value beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the action (rename) and resource (file in Google Drive), but does not differentiate from sibling tools like rename_drive_folder or move_drive_file.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions mentioned.

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