docs: complete OAuth scope list (Sheets/Docs/Slides/Drive/Forms)

[rparundekar]

Summary

Follow-up to the self-review of PR #2. Documents the full OAuth scope set the AAIF meetup ops workflows need — Sheets, Docs, Slides, Drive, and Forms — and clarifies which scopes the bundled scripts actually exercise vs. which are for operating the underlying assets directly.

Why

The README scopes note added in #2 listed only Sheets/Drive/Forms and implied Forms was a script dependency. In practice:

• The bundled Python scripts use Sheets + Drive only.
• Docs, Slides, and Forms scopes are needed for interactive ops (connector/MCP) and for working with the chapter/series source docs and decks and the intake form directly.

Changeset

• README.md — enable list now includes Slides (and keeps Docs/Forms); scope list adds documents and presentations, annotates spreadsheets/drive as (scripts), and reframes the intro so Forms/Docs/Slides are correctly described as asset/interactive scopes rather than script requirements.

Test Plan

• pre-commit run --files README.md passes (codespell, gitleaks, hygiene)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Updates the repository documentation to clearly enumerate the full set of Google OAuth scopes needed for AAIF meetup ops workflows, distinguishing what the bundled scripts require vs. what’s needed for interactive/asset operations.

Changes:

• Expands the “enable APIs” list to include Slides alongside Sheets/Docs/Drive/Forms.
• Documents additional OAuth scopes for Docs (documents) and Slides (presentations).
• Annotates which scopes are used by bundled scripts (Sheets/Drive) vs. interactive/asset operations (Docs/Slides/Forms).

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[rparundekar]

Hero Self-Review

Two agents reviewed this doc change (comment-analyzer for accuracy, code-reviewer for formatting/URLs). Code-only analyzers were skipped — this PR has no code.

Suggestions (2)

• [comment-analyzer] README.md:81-93 — The lead-in says "Grant read-write scopes — read-only access … fails on the first write," but the list includes forms.responses.readonly, a deliberately read-only scope. The earlier version reconciled this ("…and read Form responses"); the rewrite dropped that carve-out, leaving an apparent contradiction.
• [comment-analyzer] README.md:83-85 — Attributing Docs/Slides/Forms scopes to "interactive ops via the connector/MCP" is slightly broader than Options B/C actually claim (they describe Drive/Sheets only). Lean the rationale on the chapter/series source docs/decks + intake form instead.

Strengths

• All six OAuth scope URLs are exact, valid Google scope strings (both agents verified independently).
• *(scripts)* tags sit on exactly the two scopes the code uses (spreadsheets, drive) — a precise, low-rot way to encode the script-vs-interactive split.
• The API-enable list and the scope list match one-to-one; no contradictions with the verify command or gws auth options.

---

Self-review by Claude Code

[rparundekar]

Hero Self-Review Improvements

Suggestions (2 / 2 fixed):

• README.md:81 — "grant read-write scopes" contradicted the listed forms.responses.readonly scope — reworded to "read-write for anything you write to" and noted form responses are read-only by nature.
• README.md:83-85 — Docs/Slides/Forms rationale over-claimed connector/MCP support (Options B/C only cover Drive/Sheets) — reframed onto the chapter/series source docs/decks and intake form, with connector/MCP as an example rather than the basis.

Commit: e92faf8

---

Applied by Claude Code

[rparundekar]

Respond-to-PR Improvements

Code changes (0 applied): none — Copilot's single comment was already resolved by a commit pushed before this cycle.

Questions answered: none

Declined: none

Already addressed (1):

• README.md — Copilot: "read-write paragraph contradicts the read-only forms.responses.readonly scope" — fixed in e92faf8 (this review ran against the earlier 0fba3dc). The lead-in now scopes read-write to "anything you write to" and notes form responses are read-only by nature. Thread replied to and resolved.

Commits: e92faf8 (pre-existing on branch)

Remaining unresolved threads: none

---

Applied by Claude Code