Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

gws-mcp__gmail_mark_spam

Destructive

Reports one Gmail message as spam. Takes the message ID. The message gets Gmail's SPAM label and leaves the inbox, as the Report spam button does, and Gmail deletes spam for good after 30 days; gmail_unmark_spam moves it back before then. Returns the message ID, whether it is now in spam, and the labels it carries afterwards. Acts on the one message named, not on the rest of its thread.

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": {
      "message_id": "<message_id>"
    },
    "name": "gws-mcp__gmail_mark_spam"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoOptional email address of the connected account to use (e.g. 'user@gmail.com'). If omitted, the default account is used.
message_idYesThe ID of the message to report as spam.

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?

Annotations only declare destructive=true and readOnly=false; the description goes well beyond by disclosing the concrete side effects: SPAM label applied, message leaves the inbox, Gmail permanently deletes spam after 30 days. It also scopes the effect to a single message rather than the thread, which is exactly the kind of consequence an agent needs before a destructive call.

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 action and scope, then side effects, recovery path, and return shape in a compact block where every sentence carries information. Slight redundancy in "Takes the message ID," which the schema already states, keeps it from a 5.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers side effects, permanence window, reversal path, thread scoping, and even the return values (message ID, spam status, labels). Nothing material for correct invocation 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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, and the description only restates that it "Takes the message ID." It adds no format, ID-source, or account-selection meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Reports one Gmail message as spam") plus an explicit scope constraint ("Acts on the one message named, not on the rest of its thread"). An agent can distinguish it from gmail_trash and gmail_label_message without opening any schema.

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 clear usage context by anchoring to the Gmail UI ("as the Report spam button does") and names the reversing sibling gmail_unmark_spam with its timing window. It does not explicitly contrast with near-neighbors like gmail_trash or gmail_label_message, so a full when/when-not map is absent.

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

All DataToRAG 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