Skip to main content
Glama

google_drive_update_file

Modify or replace the content of an existing file in Google Drive by specifying the file ID and new data. Ensure accurate updates with optional MIME type adjustments.

Instructions

Update the content of an existing file in Google Drive

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesNew content of the file
fileIdYesID of the file to update
mimeTypeNoMIME type of the file (if different from original)

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the google_drive_update_file tool. Validates input arguments using isUpdateFileArgs and delegates to GoogleDrive.updateFile method.
    export async function handleDriveUpdateFile(
      args: any,
      googleDriveInstance: GoogleDrive
    ) {
      if (!isUpdateFileArgs(args)) {
        throw new Error("Invalid arguments for google_drive_update_file");
      }
      const { fileId, content, mimeType } = args;
      const result = await googleDriveInstance.updateFile(
        fileId,
        content,
        mimeType
      );
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: result }],
        isError: false,
      };
  • MCP tool schema definition for google_drive_update_file, including input schema and description.
    export const UPDATE_FILE_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: "google_drive_update_file",
      description: "Update the content of an existing file in Google Drive",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          fileId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "ID of the file to update",
          },
          content: {
            type: "string",
            description: "New content of the file",
          },
          mimeType: {
            type: "string",
            description: "MIME type of the file (if different from original)",
          },
        },
        required: ["fileId", "content"],
      },
    };
  • Type guard function for validating arguments to google_drive_update_file tool.
    export function isUpdateFileArgs(args: any): args is {
      fileId: string;
      content: string;
      mimeType?: string;
    } {
      return (
        args &&
        typeof args.fileId === "string" &&
        typeof args.content === "string" &&
        (args.mimeType === undefined || typeof args.mimeType === "string")
      );
    }
  • Core implementation of file update using Google Drive API v3. Handles metadata check, Google Docs limitation, and updates file content.
    async updateFile(fileId: string, content: string, mimeType?: string) {
      try {
        // First get the file metadata to verify its type
        const fileMetadata = await this.drive.files.get({
          fileId: fileId,
          fields: "name,mimeType",
        });
    
        const { mimeType: fileMimeType } = fileMetadata.data;
    
        // Check if this is a Google Doc/Sheet - these require different update approach
        if (fileMimeType.includes("application/vnd.google-apps")) {
          throw new Error(
            `Updating Google ${fileMimeType
              .split(".")
              .pop()} content is not supported via this tool. Please use the Google Drive web interface.`
          );
        }
    
        // Update regular file content
        const response = await this.drive.files.update({
          fileId: fileId,
          media: {
            mimeType: mimeType || fileMimeType,
            body: content,
          },
          fields: "id,name",
        });
    
        return `File '${response.data.name}' updated successfully.`;
      } catch (error) {
        throw new Error(
          `Failed to update file: ${
            error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)
          }`
        );
      }
    }
  • Server dispatch case that routes calls to the google_drive_update_file handler.
    case "google_drive_update_file":
      return await driveHandlers.handleDriveUpdateFile(
        args,
        googleDriveInstance
      );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Update' implies a mutation operation, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits: whether this overwrites or appends content, what permissions are required, whether version history is created, what happens if the file is shared or in a shared drive, or what the response looks like. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with clear purpose and good schema documentation, and the information is front-loaded with the core action immediately apparent.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what happens during the update (overwrite vs append), what permissions are needed, whether changes are reversible, what the response contains, or how errors are handled. Given the complexity of file updates and the lack of structured behavioral information, the description should provide more operational context.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema descriptions. It mentions 'content' and 'existing file' which align with the schema parameters, but provides no additional context about parameter usage, constraints, or relationships. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Update') and resource ('content of an existing file in Google Drive'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from obvious siblings like 'google_drive_create_file' by specifying 'existing file', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other update operations like 'google_drive_share_file' which also modifies files.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (like needing edit permissions), when to use 'google_drive_create_file' for new files instead, or how this differs from 'google_drive_share_file' which also updates file properties. The agent must infer usage from the name and description alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/vakharwalad23/google-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server