Inbox Triage

Propose unsubscribing from a message's sender

propose_unsubscribe

Looks at a synced message's List-Unsubscribe header info and, when it has a confirmed one-click (https) link, returns a pending unsubscribe request for the person to approve in the app prompt or on the approval page. Call confirm_unsubscribe next, only after they say yes. Never sends anything itself. When the sender only offers a mailto: unsubscribe address, or an https link that is not confirmed one-click-safe (no List-Unsubscribe-Post), this returns sayToHuman guidance instead of a pending request. Do not attempt to email or guess on the human's behalf. Check get_triage_profile first: VIP people/domains are never-auto, so ask the human before acting on their mail. Approval is the app prompt or the approval page (approvalUrl); the result says which (approvalPath). Chat approval does not count.

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": {
      "inboxId": "<inboxId>",
      "messageId": "<messageId>"
    },
    "name": "propose_unsubscribe"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`inboxId`	Yes
`confirmed`	No	Only needed when the sender is on the VIP list: pass true after the human agrees in chat.
`messageId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the important behavior: nothing is sent, a pending request is produced, the approval channel is the app prompt or approvalUrl (not chat), and mailto: or unconfirmed one-click links return sayToHuman guidance instead of a request. That is substantive context beyond annotations.

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 purpose and the safe-to-call guarantee, then caveats. It is longer than ideal, and a couple of clauses restate the same idea ('Never sends anything itself' and 'Do not attempt to email or guess on the human's behalf'), but nearly every sentence carries a distinct rule.

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 proposal/decision-style tool with no output schema, the description covers return values (pending request, sayToHuman guidance, approvalPath) and the safety model (never sends, requires human approval). An agent knows how to call it, what it gets back, and what to do next.

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 only 33%, but the description compensates for the confirmed parameter by injecting it into the VIP flow (never-auto, ask the human first, chat approval does not count), working with the schema's own hint. inboxId and messageId are left implicit as identifiers of the synced message, a minor gap.

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: 'look at a synced message's List-Unsubscribe header info' and 'return a pending unsubscribe request for the person to approve.' The scope of 'propose, never act' distinguishes it from confirm_unsubscribe and review_unsubscribes.

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 sequencing: call confirm_unsubscribe next, only after they say yes; check get_triage_profile first for VIP handling; ask the human before acting on VIP mail. It also names the fallback as an alternative outcome (sayToHuman guidance) when only mailto: or unconfirmed https is present.

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

All Inbox Triage 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?