Skip to main content
Glama

Unpin a conversation

unpin_conversation

Remove one conversation's pin, returning it to its cluster in the feed. Affects Busymail only: nothing moves in the mailbox, and the mail is not archived. The reply's result field says unpinned, or still_covered_by_cluster_pin when the thread's whole cluster is pinned - that is a separate pin which keeps the thread in the Pins tab, so unpin the cluster if that is what was wanted. Unpinning something that is not pinned is not an error.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "conversation_id": "<conversation_id>"
    },
    "name": "unpin_conversation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
conversation_idYesThe conversation's UUID, from list_feed, get_cluster or search.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses the Busymail-only effect, that the mail is not archived, that unpinning an unpinned item is not an error, and the exact result field values including still_covered_by_cluster_pin.

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 effect and scope come first, followed by the result-value caveat. The middle sentence is long and packs two ideas together, but every sentence carries information the agent needs.

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 one-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers scope, side effects, idempotency, and the meaning of return values. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the single conversation_id parameter is already documented in the schema with its sources (list_feed, get_cluster, search). The description adds no further parameter meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Remove one conversation's pin") and scopes the effect ("returning it to its cluster in the feed"), which cleanly separates it from the sibling unpin_cluster.

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 tells the agent what this does not do (nothing moves in the mailbox, no archiving) and routes the agent to unpin_cluster when the whole cluster is pinned. It stops short of spelling out explicit when-not-to-use conditions beyond the cluster-pin case, but the conditional alternative is clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources