Cooper Email

Move threads to a folder

cooper_move_threads

Idempotent

Use this when several conversations should move to the same folder in one call, for example archiving finished work or trashing a batch. Requires auth. Same permission as updating thread labels. Inputs: inbox_id (required; inbox id, username, or email), thread_ids (required array of 1 to 100 thread ids), folder (required; inbox, archive, spam, or trash). Returns {moved:[ids that exist in this inbox], not_found:[ids that do not]}. Ids stay in request order. A thread already in that folder is listed in moved and does not emit thread.folder_updated. Unknown ids in this inbox are not_found, not an error. Another account's inbox returns HTTP 404 inbox_not_found. A missing, empty, or duplicate thread_ids returns missing_thread_ids, invalid_thread_ids, or duplicate_thread_ids. More than 100 ids returns too_many_ids. A bad folder returns invalid_folder.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`folder`	Yes	Destination folder. inbox removes the folder row. A bad value returns invalid_folder.
`inbox_id`	Yes	Inbox id (inb_…), username, or full email address owned by this key
`thread_ids`	Yes	Thread ids (thr_…) to move. 1 to 100 unique ids. Unknown ids are returned in not_found.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`moved`	No	Thread ids that exist in this inbox, in request order.
`not_found`	No	Thread ids that do not exist in this inbox.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Which thread ids moved.",
+  "properties": {
+    "moved": {
+      "description": "Thread ids that exist in this inbox, in request order."
+    },
+    "not_found": {
+      "description": "Thread ids that do not exist in this inbox."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial operational detail beyond them: already-in-folder threads count as moved without emitting thread.folder_updated, cross-account access yields HTTP 404 inbox_not_found, and each error condition maps to a specific code. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs for a mutation with event side effects.

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 trigger condition, then prerequisites, inputs, return shape, and error codes in a tight sequence. The string of error codes is dense but each earns its place as a discrete failure mode; it stops just short of being a wall of text.

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?

Given a batch mutation with an output schema and rich annotations, the description closes every gap: permission requirement, idempotent no-op behavior, ordering guarantee, partial-success semantics (moved vs not_found), and the full error taxonomy. An agent could call this correctly without opening any sibling tool.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema: duplicate ids trigger duplicate_thread_ids, exceeding 100 triggers too_many_ids, and the folder enum's 'inbox removes the folder row' semantics plus invalid_folder behavior. It mostly restates the schema but does so with error-binding detail that sharpens edge cases.

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 (move) and resource (conversations/threads) with an explicit batch-to-one-folder scope, immediately distinguishing it from single-thread update tools. The example use cases (archiving, trashing a batch) make the operation concrete.

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 opening clause explicitly frames the condition for use: 'when several conversations should move to the same folder in one call,' which naturally routes single-thread edits elsewhere. It lacks a named sibling alternative, but the batching trigger is clear enough to select correctly among the many thread tools.

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

All Cooper Email 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.