Skip to main content
Glama

mailbox

by bot.mailbox
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_outbound_mail

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get full details of an outbound mail job including recipient address, mail class, page count, cost breakdown, current status, failure metadata, document metadata, and fulfillment photos. Legacy plaintext records may include direct document URLs; encrypted source documents are retrieved through the REST document endpoint with document.read scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mail_idYesUUID of the outbound mail job to retrieve.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYesFull outbound mail job details. Direct document URLs are only present for legacy plaintext rows.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / result / description
      Previous value: -"Full outbound mail job details with signed document URL."New value: +"Full outbound mail job details. Direct document URLs are only present for legacy plaintext rows."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Full outbound mail job details with signed document URL.",
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only/idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral context: legacy records may contain direct document URLs, while encrypted documents are fetched via a REST endpoint requiring document.read scope. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent anticipate authentication and data-format nuances.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and the second adds an important caveat about document retrieval. No fluff; every phrase earns its place.

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?

The description covers the full scope of returned data (including metadata, failure info, photos) and describes the special case for encrypted vs. plaintext documents. Together with the output schema, it is fully complete for this get-by-id tool.

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% (mail_id is described as UUID of the job to retrieve). The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter itself, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the tool retrieves full details of a single outbound mail job, listing specific fields (recipient, mail class, cost, status, etc.). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_outbound_mail (which lists jobs) and get_inbound_mail (which handles inbound).

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?

The description implies usage: call this when you need comprehensive details for a specific outbound mail job (by ID). It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is clear enough that it is the detail endpoint vs. a list or action tool.

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

All mailbox 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