Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Tulina

by ai.tulina.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

mailpool_mailboxes

Mailpool mailboxes: address, name, type, status, domain, IMAP/SMTP hosts.

Credentials (mailbox, IMAP/SMTP and admin passwords) are never returned; they stay in the Mailpool dashboard.

Ops:

  • list — the workspace's mailboxes, optionally of one domain_id. limit (1-100) / offset paginate.

  • get — one mailbox (mailbox_id).

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": "mailpool_mailboxes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opNolist or get.list
_orgNoOrg (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
limitNopage size, 1-100.
_groupNoÉquipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
offsetNoitems to skip.
_run_idNoOBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
_projectNoProjet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
_instanceNoInstance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.
domain_idNoonly the mailboxes of this domain (op="list").
mailbox_idNoMailpool mailbox id (op="get").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a useful behavioral fact: credentials (mailbox, IMAP/SMTP, admin passwords) are never returned and live in the dashboard, and it states the 1-100 page-size bound. It omits permission/tenancy requirements, rate limits, and whether the operation is strictly read-only, which the schema's French-language tenancy params hint at but do not clarify.

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 attribute list is front-loaded, followed by a short ops block, with no filler. The opening attribute enumeration is slightly cryptic as a standalone phrase but still earns its place by scoping the payload.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 10-parameter, zero-required, no-output-schema tool with full schema coverage, the description covers both operations and one important behavioral caveat. The main residual gap is that the tenancy parameters (_org, _project, _run_id) and their per-call requirements are only explained in the schema, not in the description.

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 baseline is 3; the description's notes on limit/offset and the op-scoped role of domain_id and mailbox_id restate what the schema already documents. It adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields.

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?

States the resource (Mailpool mailboxes) and enumerates the attributes returned plus the two supported operations (list, get), so an agent can tell this apart from mailpool_domains or mailpool_account. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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?

Per-operation guidance is clear: list for the workspace's mailboxes with optional domain_id filtering and limit/offset pagination, get for a single mailbox by mailbox_id. There is no explicit when-not-to-use or pointer to alternative tools for related mailbox data.

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

All Tulina 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