Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

RelayLink

by ai.relaylink
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Tag a thread

tag_thread
Idempotent

Put the user's own labels on a thread, or take them off. Tags are private to this account: the other participant never sees them, nothing is sent, and they never enter a package. Use them to file conversations the way the user thinks about them, and to narrow list_threads, thread_status, check_inbox and search_messages later. list_tags shows the names already in use — reuse one before inventing another. Adding a tag that is already there changes nothing.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "tag_thread"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addNoTags to add. Lowercased; spaces and punctuation become hyphens; at most 12 on one thread.
removeNoTags to remove.
threadIdNoThe thread_id, from list_threads or thread_status.
packageIdNoOr a package_id: names the thread that package is on.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare that this is not read-only, is idempotent, and is non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: tags are private to the account, are never sent to the other participant, and never enter a package. It does not add details about return shape or error cases, but the privacy and side-effect scope are well covered.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and then adds privacy, use cases, and the list_tags pointer. It is somewhat repetitive around privacy ('nothing is sent' and 'never enter a package'), but remains efficient and readable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tagging mutation with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description supplies the missing behavioral context: privacy, downstream uses, idempotency reinforcement, and tag-name reuse guidance. No output schema exists, so no return-value explanation is required.

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 add, remove, threadId, and packageId thoroughly. The description reinforces the add/remove concept but does not add format or normalization details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: putting the user's own labels on a thread or taking them off. It makes the tool distinguishable from adjacent tools by emphasizing that these are private thread tags, not contact tags or package content.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear usage context: filing conversations and later narrowing list_threads, thread_status, check_inbox, and search_messages. It also points to list_tags as the source of existing names. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus tag_contact, so it falls short of a full when/when-not/alternatives treatment.

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

All RelayLink toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources