Refine Job Search

inbox.decline

Destructive

Queue decline replies to recruiter outreach. Depending on the user's preference this SENDS email from their address. Only call after the user explicitly approved declining these specific conversations.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	Yes	Inbox item ids to decline
`remember`	No	Save the preference for future declines
`confirmed`	Yes	Must be true, and only after the user explicitly approved declining these conversations
`preference`	No	Send preference to apply; omit to use the saved preference

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`meta`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 22, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / next_page / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / next_page / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / total_count / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / total_count / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```
Changed1 schema field changedAug 26, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / ids / minItems
```
Added value: +1
```
AddedAug 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds the crucial undisclosed detail that it may SEND real email from the user's address depending on preference. It does not say whether queued declines can be cancelled or reversed, which matters for a destructive, non-idempotent tool.

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?

Three short sentences: purpose first, side effect second, safety gate last. Every clause carries information an agent needs; nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations verbatim.

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?

With a full schema, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the pieces structured data cannot: the conditional email send and the approval precondition. Only the reversibility/undo path and batch-size implications are left implicit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the sentence 'Depending on the user's preference this SENDS email' gives real meaning to the preference enum that the schema only labels ('Send preference to apply'). The approval wording also reinforces the const-true 'confirmed' gate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Queue decline replies to recruiter outreach'), which clearly separates it from inbox.draft_reply and inbox.send_reply. It also flags the surprising twist that queueing may actually transmit mail, so an agent knows exactly what class of operation this is.

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?

Gives an explicit, strong gating condition: 'Only call after the user explicitly approved declining these specific conversations.' It does not name alternatives (e.g. draft_reply when the user has not decided, or undo after a mistaken batch), so it stops just short of full routing guidance.

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

All Refine Job Search tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?