hermes - 💡(How to fix) Fix google-workspace skill: add multi-account support [1 participants]

Summary

The productivity/google-workspace skill is single-account by design — the OAuth setup writes one token at ~/.hermes/google_token.json and google_api.py reads from that fixed path. For users with both a personal and a work Google Workspace account, this means only one is reachable through hermes; the other has to be routed through an external tool.

I've been hitting this on my own setup (personal @gmail.com + work @reimaginerobotics.ai). My agent currently can't reply to "check my work email" without me wiring an unrelated CLI (gog) on the side. Filing this in case there's appetite for a vendor-supported path.

Proposed shape

Optional --account <email> flag throughout setup.py and google_api.py. Per-account token files at ~/.hermes/google_tokens/<email>.json (with the existing google_token.json symlinked to a configured default for backward compat). When the flag is omitted, behavior matches today — single-account, default token file.

# Add a second account
$GSETUP --account [email protected] --auth-url
$GSETUP --account [email protected] --auth-code <code>
$GSETUP --check --account [email protected]   # AUTHENTICATED: ...

# Use it
google_api.py --account [email protected] gmail search 'is:unread'

OAuth flow already supports per-call client_secret + scope selection, so the change is mostly:

1. setup.py — parameterize TOKEN_PATH on --account (or fall back to default)
2. google_api.py — same, plus thread the flag through to credential loading
3. SKILL.md — document the multi-account flow

Existing single-account workflows stay unchanged when the flag is omitted.

Why now

A reference implementation already exists outside hermes (the gog CLI from steipete supports --account natively + handles per-account scopes). That's the workaround I'm using locally and what this issue would let users skip.

Happy to PR

If maintainers agree on the shape (per-account token files, optional flag, no breaking change), I can put up a PR. Wanted to surface the design first rather than land code that conflicts with whatever's already planned.