Emailchaser

Connect sender email

connect_sender_email

Connects an SMTP/IMAP mailbox to the workspace using an app password, with no browser step. Google and Microsoft mailboxes are NOT supported here because both require an interactive consent screen that cannot be automated; connect those in the app. The address must be on a business domain, so gmail.com and similar are rejected. The returned account's healthScore is null until warm-up has checked 20 of its emails.

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": {
      "email": "<email>",
      "password": "<password>",
      "imapServerUrl": "<imapServerUrl>",
      "smtpServerUrl": "<smtpServerUrl>"
    },
    "name": "connect_sender_email"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	Yes	The mailbox address, on a business domain
`lastName`	No	Sender last name
`password`	Yes	App password for the mailbox, not the account login password
`firstName`	No	Sender first name
`loginString`	No	Login username if it differs from the email address
`imapServerUrl`	Yes	IMAP host, optionally with a port, e.g. imap.fastmail.com:993
`smtpServerUrl`	Yes	SMTP host, optionally with a port, e.g. smtp.fastmail.com:587

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 29, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

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

First observedSep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write/external nature is already known; the description adds real value by disclosing the no-browser constraint, the app-password requirement, and the post-creation state (healthScore null until 20 emails are checked during warm-up). It does not say what happens on auth failure or whether reconnecting an existing address creates a duplicate, which is the remaining gap.

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 sentences, each carrying a distinct constraint, with the core action first and the exclusions and post-conditions following. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 7-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers eligibility, credential type, and the notable return-state caveat. Optional identity fields (firstName, lastName, loginString) are left entirely to the schema, which is reasonable but leaves the description slightly short of fully self-contained.

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 coverage is 100%, so all seven parameters are already documented, including the app-password distinction and the business-domain constraint on email. The description restates those two constraints rather than adding new meaning, 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: connects an SMTP/IMAP mailbox to the workspace via app password without a browser step. This clearly separates it from read/update siblings such as get_sender_email and update_sender_email, and the mechanism (app password, no OAuth) is stated up front.

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?

It gives explicit when-not conditions: Google and Microsoft mailboxes are excluded because they need an interactive consent screen, with the alternative being to connect them in the app. It also states the business-domain requirement, ruling out gmail.com and similar addresses before the agent attempts a call.

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

All Emailchaser 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.

Resources

Need Help?