Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

gws-mcp__gmail_untrash_thread

Takes a whole Gmail conversation out of Trash: every message in the thread, in one call. Takes the thread ID. Returns the thread ID and, for each message in it, the message ID and whether it is still in Trash. Messages Gmail has already deleted from Trash are gone and are not in the answer.

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": {
      "thread_id": "<thread_id>"
    },
    "name": "gws-mcp__gmail_untrash_thread"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoOptional email address of the connected account to use (e.g. 'user@gmail.com'). If omitted, the default account is used.
thread_idYesThe ID of the thread to take out of Trash.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description goes further by explaining the blast radius (all messages in the thread at once) and a real behavioral edge case — messages already purged from Trash are permanently gone and absent from the result. Since there is no output schema, spending words on the return shape (thread ID plus per-message ID and remaining-in-Trash flag) is genuinely additive rather than redundant.

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?

Three short sentences with the action and scope front-loaded, followed by input and output. The sentence 'Takes the thread ID' is slightly redundant given the schema but is a cheap signpost; otherwise there is no filler.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers what changes, the granularity of the change, what comes back, and the irreversible-loss caveat. The only gap is lack of explicit routing versus the sibling single-message and trash tools.

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 both parameters are documented there, including the optional 'account'. The description only restates 'Takes the thread ID', adding no format hints, ID source, or account-selection guidance, so it sits at the baseline for a fully documented schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Takes a whole Gmail conversation out of Trash') and scopes it unmistakably as whole-thread ('every message in the thread, in one call'), which implicitly separates it from the single-message gws-mcp__gmail_untrash and the inverse gws-mcp__gmail_trash_thread. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so an agent must infer the contrast rather than read it.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the action: restore a thread that currently sits in Trash. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over gws-mcp__gmail_untrash (single message) or of any precondition such as the thread actually being trashed. An agent can infer the scenario but gets no routing rules.

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