Skip to main content
Glama
vamsikiran353-gif

Google Slides MCP Server

by vamsikiran353-gif
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Google Slides MCP Server

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides tools for interacting with Google Slides presentations. This server allows you to create new slides and add rectangles to existing slides.

Features

  • Create New Slides: Add blank slides to existing Google Slides presentations

  • Add Rectangles: Insert rectangles with dimensions that are 20% of the slide size

  • OAuth2 Authentication: Secure authentication flow with Google APIs

  • Presentation Management: Get presentation info and list slides

Related MCP server: Google Workspace MCP Server

Installation

  1. Clone or download this repository

  2. Install dependencies:

npm install

  1. Build the TypeScript code:

npm run build

Google Cloud Console Setup

Before using this MCP server, you need to set up a Google Cloud project and enable the Google Slides API:

1. Create a Google Cloud Project

  1. Go to the Google Cloud Console

  2. Create a new project or select an existing one

  3. Enable the Google Slides API:

    • Go to "APIs & Services" > "Library"

    • Search for "Google Slides API"

    • Click on it and press "Enable"

2. Create OAuth2 Credentials

  1. Go to "APIs & Services" > "Credentials"

  2. Click "Create Credentials" > "OAuth client ID"

  3. If prompted, configure the OAuth consent screen first:

    • Choose "External" user type

    • Fill in the required fields (App name, User support email, etc.)

    • Add your email to test users

  4. For the OAuth client ID:

    • Choose "Desktop application" as the application type

    • Give it a name (e.g., "Google Slides MCP Server")

  5. Download the credentials JSON file

3. Configure Environment Variables

  1. Copy .env.example to .env:

cp .env.example .env

  1. Edit .env and add your OAuth2 credentials:

GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID=your_client_id_here
GOOGLE_CLIENT_SECRET=your_client_secret_here
GOOGLE_REDIRECT_URI=http://localhost:3000/oauth2callback

Usage

Starting the Server

npm start

Or for development with auto-reload:

npm run dev

Authentication Flow

Before using the Google Slides tools, you need to authenticate:

  1. Call the get_auth_url tool to get the OAuth2 authorization URL

  2. Visit the URL in your browser and grant permissions

  3. Copy the authorization code from the redirect URL

  4. Call the authenticate tool with the authorization code

The authentication tokens will be saved locally and reused for future requests.

Available Tools

1. get_auth_url

Get the OAuth2 authorization URL for Google Slides access.

Parameters: None

Example:

{
  "name": "get_auth_url",
  "arguments": {}
}

2. authenticate

Complete OAuth2 authentication with authorization code.

Parameters:

  • code (string, required): Authorization code from OAuth2 flow

Example:

{
  "name": "authenticate",
  "arguments": {
    "code": "4/0AX4XfWh..."
  }
}

3. create_slide

Create a new slide in a Google Slides presentation.

Parameters:

  • presentationId (string, required): The ID of the Google Slides presentation

  • insertionIndex (number, optional): Position where to insert the slide (defaults to 0)

Example:

{
  "name": "create_slide",
  "arguments": {
    "presentationId": "1BxAB07047kHMdtbgoC48KDz3YMgn9_12345678",
    "insertionIndex": 1
  }
}

4. add_rectangle

Add a rectangle to a slide with 20% of slide dimensions.

Parameters:

  • presentationId (string, required): The ID of the Google Slides presentation

  • slideId (string, required): The ID of the slide to add the rectangle to

  • x (number, optional): X position of the rectangle (defaults to center)

  • y (number, optional): Y position of the rectangle (defaults to center)

  • width (number, optional): Width of the rectangle (defaults to 20% of slide width)

  • height (number, optional): Height of the rectangle (defaults to 20% of slide height)

Example:

{
  "name": "add_rectangle",
  "arguments": {
    "presentationId": "1BxAB07047kHMdtbgoC48KDz3YMgn9_12345678",
    "slideId": "slide_12345"
  }
}

5. get_presentation_info

Get information about a Google Slides presentation.

Parameters:

  • presentationId (string, required): The ID of the Google Slides presentation

Example:

{
  "name": "get_presentation_info",
  "arguments": {
    "presentationId": "1BxAB07047kHMdtbgoC48KDz3YMgn9_12345678"
  }
}

6. list_slides

List all slides in a Google Slides presentation.

Parameters:

  • presentationId (string, required): The ID of the Google Slides presentation

Example:

{
  "name": "list_slides",
  "arguments": {
    "presentationId": "1BxAB07047kHMdtbgoC48KDz3YMgn9_12345678"
  }
}

Finding Your Presentation ID

The presentation ID can be found in the Google Slides URL:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/PRESENTATION_ID_HERE/edit

For example, in this URL:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BxAB07047kHMdtbgoC48KDz3YMgn9_abcdefgh/edit

The presentation ID is: 1BxAB07047kHMdtbgoC48KDz3YMgn9_abcdefgh

Common Workflow

  1. First time setup:

    # Get authorization URL
{"name": "get_auth_url", "arguments": {}}

# After visiting URL and getting code
{"name": "authenticate", "arguments": {"code": "your_auth_code"}}

  2. Create a new slide:

    {"name": "create_slide", "arguments": {"presentationId": "your_presentation_id"}}

  3. Add a rectangle to the slide:

    {"name": "add_rectangle", "arguments": {"presentationId": "your_presentation_id", "slideId": "returned_slide_id"}}

Error Handling

The server provides detailed error messages for common issues:

  • Authentication required

  • Invalid presentation ID

  • Invalid slide ID

  • Network connectivity issues

  • Google API quota limits

Development

Project Structure

src/
├── index.ts      # Main MCP server entry point
├── auth.ts       # Google OAuth2 authentication
└── slides.ts     # Google Slides API service

dist/             # Compiled JavaScript (after npm run build)
package.json      # Project dependencies and scripts
tsconfig.json     # TypeScript configuration
.env.example      # Environment variables template

Scripts

  • npm run build - Compile TypeScript to JavaScript

  • npm start - Run the compiled server

  • npm run dev - Run with ts-node for development

  • npm run watch - Watch for changes and recompile

Troubleshooting

Authentication Issues

  • Ensure your Google Cloud project has the Google Slides API enabled

  • Check that your OAuth2 credentials are correct in the .env file

  • Make sure you're using the correct redirect URI

  • Verify that your email is added as a test user if using external OAuth consent

API Errors

  • Check that the presentation ID is correct and accessible

  • Ensure you have edit permissions for the Google Slides presentation

  • Verify that the slide ID exists when adding rectangles

Permission Errors

The server requires the following Google API scopes:

  • https://www.googleapis.com/auth/presentations - For creating and editing slides

  • https://www.googleapis.com/auth/drive.file - For accessing Google Drive files

License

MIT

Available Tools

6 tools
add_rectangleC

Add a rectangle to a slide with 20% of slide dimensions

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
heightNoHeight of the rectangle (optional, defaults to 20% of slide height)
presentationIdYesThe ID of the Google Slides presentation
slideIdYesThe ID of the slide to add the rectangle to
widthNoWidth of the rectangle (optional, defaults to 20% of slide width)
xNoX position of the rectangle (optional, defaults to center)
yNoY position of the rectangle (optional, defaults to center)

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the default dimensions (20% of slide dimensions) and implies a creation action ('Add'), but doesn't describe what happens upon invocation (e.g., whether it returns the rectangle ID, if it modifies the slide in place, error conditions, or permission requirements). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 front-loads the core action ('Add a rectangle to a slide') and includes key default behavior ('with 20% of slide dimensions'). There is no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a mutation with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return values, error handling, dependencies (e.g., slide existence), and how it fits with sibling tools. The high schema coverage helps with parameters, but overall context for safe and effective use is incomplete.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema itself (e.g., defaults for height, width, x, y). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning the 20% default for dimensions, but doesn't provide additional context like unit explanations, coordinate systems, or interaction effects between parameters. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Add a rectangle') and the target resource ('to a slide'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It also specifies the default dimensions ('with 20% of slide dimensions'), which adds useful context. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from potential sibling tools like 'create_slide', though the specificity of adding a rectangle to an existing slide is inherently distinct.

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 (e.g., needing an existing slide or presentation), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'create_slide' or 'list_slides'. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone.

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

authenticateA

Complete OAuth2 authentication with authorization code

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYesAuthorization code from OAuth2 flow

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly identifies this as an authentication operation (implying it establishes credentials/session), but doesn't specify whether it returns tokens, sets cookies, persists state, or has side effects like rate limits. It adds basic context about the OAuth2 mechanism but lacks operational details.

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 communicates the essential purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and includes only relevant technical context. Every element earns its place.

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 an authentication tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose and usage context. However, it doesn't explain what happens after authentication completes (e.g., token storage, session establishment, or error handling), which would be important for agent decision-making. The description is complete enough for basic understanding but lacks operational 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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'code' already documented in the schema as 'Authorization code from OAuth2 flow'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Complete OAuth2 authentication') and the mechanism ('with authorization code'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_auth_url' which would provide the authorization code. It uses precise technical terminology that accurately reflects the tool's function.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly indicates when to use this tool: after obtaining an authorization code from an OAuth2 flow. It distinguishes from 'get_auth_url' (which would be used before this tool) and other presentation-related siblings, providing clear contextual boundaries for its application.

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

create_slideC

Create a new slide in a Google Slides presentation

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
insertionIndexNoPosition where to insert the slide (optional, defaults to 0)
presentationIdYesThe ID of the Google Slides presentation

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates a slide, implying a write operation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like required permissions, whether the action is reversible, rate limits, or what the output looks like (since there's no output schema). This leaves significant gaps for safe and effective use.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of a write operation (creating a slide) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, and usage context, which are essential for an agent to use this tool correctly in a real-world scenario.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting both parameters (presentationId and insertionIndex). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format details or examples, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 ('Create a new slide') and resource ('in a Google Slides presentation'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from potential siblings like 'add_rectangle' or 'list_slides', which might also involve slide manipulation, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 (e.g., needing a presentation ID), exclusions, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'add_rectangle' or 'list_slides', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

get_auth_urlB

Get the OAuth2 authorization URL for Google Slides access

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
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. It states the tool retrieves an OAuth2 URL but doesn't describe what happens after (e.g., redirect flow, token exchange), whether it's idempotent, or any rate limits. For a security-sensitive OAuth2 tool, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

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 directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool and front-loads the essential information without unnecessary elaboration.

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 an OAuth2-related tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the returned URL looks like, how to use it, or integration with the authentication flow. Given the security context and sibling 'authenticate' tool, more guidance is needed for proper agent usage.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't waste space discussing nonexistent parameters, though it could optionally mention implicit context like user session or scopes if relevant.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('OAuth2 authorization URL for Google Slides access'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'authenticate' by focusing on URL retrieval rather than the full authentication flow. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other potential URL-related tools.

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 like 'authenticate' or other sibling tools. It doesn't mention prerequisites, sequencing, or contextual triggers for OAuth2 URL retrieval, leaving the agent to infer usage patterns.

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

get_presentation_infoC

Get information about a Google Slides presentation

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
presentationIdYesThe ID of the Google Slides presentation

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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. It states this is a read operation ('Get information'), but doesn't specify whether it requires authentication, what permissions are needed, whether there are rate limits, what format the information comes in, or if there are any side effects. The description is minimal and leaves critical behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately. Every word earns its place in this concise formulation.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what information is returned (metadata, slide count, permissions, etc.), doesn't mention authentication requirements despite sibling tools including authentication-related tools, and provides no behavioral context. The agent would be left guessing about critical aspects of tool usage.

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 the schema already documents the single 'presentationId' parameter adequately. The description doesn't add any additional meaning about the parameter beyond what's in the schema (it doesn't explain where to find presentation IDs, format requirements, or examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the 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 action ('Get information') and resource ('Google Slides presentation'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from potential siblings like 'list_slides' or specify what type of information is retrieved (metadata, content, structure, etc.).

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 authentication first), when this tool is appropriate versus 'list_slides' for browsing presentations, or any limitations on what presentations can be accessed.

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

list_slidesC

List all slides in a Google Slides presentation

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
presentationIdYesThe ID of the Google Slides presentation

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List all slides') but doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, how results are returned (e.g., pagination, format), or potential errors. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with external resources.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like authentication needs, error handling, or return format, which are critical for a tool that lists slides from an external service like Google Slides. This leaves the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the 'presentationId' parameter fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the parameter is needed, so it meets the baseline score of 3 where the 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 ('List') and resource ('all slides in a Google Slides presentation'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_presentation_info', which might also retrieve presentation-related data, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 like 'get_presentation_info' or 'create_slide'. It lacks any context about prerequisites, such as needing an authenticated session or a valid presentation ID, leaving usage entirely implicit.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 6 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedadd_rectangle
    • First observedauthenticate
    • First observedcreate_slide
    • First observedget_auth_url
    • First observedget_presentation_info
    • First observedlist_slides
Deploy Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Scored across 6 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no overlap: authentication (authenticate, get_auth_url), presentation management (get_presentation_info, list_slides, create_slide), and content manipulation (add_rectangle). The descriptions make it easy to differentiate between presentation-level operations and slide-specific actions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern using snake_case (e.g., create_slide, get_presentation_info, add_rectangle). The naming is predictable and readable throughout the set, with no deviations in style or convention.

Tool Count4/5

Six tools is reasonable for a Google Slides server, covering authentication, presentation info, slide listing/creation, and basic shape addition. It feels slightly thin for content manipulation (only rectangles), but the core operations are well-scoped and not excessive.

Completeness3/5

The server covers authentication and basic presentation/slide management well, but there are notable gaps in content manipulation. It only supports adding rectangles, missing other shapes, text, images, or editing/deleting elements, which limits agent workflows for comprehensive slide creation.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches