Multi Mail

Send a draft

drafts_send

DestructiveIdempotent

Send a draft. It leaves the mailbox and consumes the draft. Only a draft is sent: a message already sent or received is refused, and nothing leaves. Call this only when the person asked for this message to go; when they asked to prepare one, draft it instead. A request id already spent sends nothing again: the answer says whether that send went or may have gone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The id a draft tool answered, or the draftId a search or a read answered.
`mailbox`	Yes	The mailbox's name or its email address.
`requestId`	Yes	Your own id for this send, new for every message. One whose send went or may have gone sends nothing again.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`accepted`	No
`threadId`	Yes
`messageId`	No
`sentCopyKept`	No
`refusedRecipients`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 8, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / sentCopyKept
```
Added value: +{
+  "const": false,
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 8, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed1 schema field changedOct 8, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / refusedRecipients
```
Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
```

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 6, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / id / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / id / type

Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / threadId / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / threadId / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive=true and idempotent=true, and the description substantiates both: it says the draft is consumed and that a spent requestId sends nothing again, with the response indicating whether the send went or may have gone. That is real added context about state destruction and at-least-once ambiguity, not a restatement of the hints.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and effect, and every sentence carries information. The final sentence is somewhat convoluted ('whether that send went or may have gone'), a minor readability cost in an otherwise tight definition.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be documented, and the description still tells the agent the response disambiguates send outcome. Preconditions, destructive effect, and idempotency semantics are all covered for a three-parameter mutation 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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already explains id, mailbox, and the requestId idempotency contract nearly verbatim ('One whose send went or may have gone sends nothing again'). The description largely echoes that, adding little syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Send a draft') and immediately defines the effect ('It leaves the mailbox and consumes the draft'). It also draws the boundary against siblings by declaring that only drafts qualify and that preparation belongs to a draft tool, so an agent can separate it from drafts_create and messages_send.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use and when-not: 'Call this only when the person asked for this message to go; when they asked to prepare one, draft it instead.' It also states the precondition (a message already sent or received is refused, and nothing leaves) and the requestId reuse rule.

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

All Multi Mail tools Inspect

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.