Skip to main content
Glama

Sliq

by com.getsliq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Manage Inbox

manage_inbox

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesThe operation to perform. One of: - 'list_labels': List available labels (Gmail) or categories (Outlook). - 'apply_label': Apply a label/category to emails. Creates if it doesn't exist. Requires email_ids and label_name. - 'remove_label': Remove a label/category from emails. Requires email_ids and label_name. - 'archive': Archive emails (removes from inbox, keeps in account). Requires email_ids. - 'mark_read': Mark emails as read. Requires email_ids. - 'unsubscribe': Unsubscribe from a mailing list via List-Unsubscribe header. Requires email_ids (one email). ALWAYS confirm with the user before calling this. - 'search_by_label': Search emails by label (Gmail) or category (Outlook). Requires label_name. Returns matching emails directly from the provider API.
mailboxNoEmail address of a connected mailbox. Optional — when not given and email_ids are present, the mailbox is inferred from the email row's connected_email. When neither is available and the user has multiple mailboxes, ask which to use.
providerNoWhich email account to use ('outlook' or 'gmail'). Only needed if the user has both connected and no email_ids are provided.
email_idsNoList of email IDs from search_emails results.
label_nameNoLabel name for apply_label, remove_label, or search_by_label actions.
max_resultsNoMaximum number of emails to return for search_by_label (default 20, max 50).
on_behalf_ofNoA teammate's email (one with team actions turned on), or an agency client's from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account.
exclusive_labelsNoFor apply_label only. A set of mutually exclusive labels (e.g. inbox organization categories). When provided, applying a label automatically removes any other exclusive_labels from older messages in the same thread. This keeps one label per thread.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / on_behalf_of / description
      Previous value: -"Act on a consented teammate's inbox instead of your own — pass\ntheir email. Every action (label, archive, mark read, unsubscribe) runs\nagainst their mailbox. Gated on that teammate's act-on-behalf setting\n(stricter than conversation sharing); a teammate who hasn't granted it is\nrejected. Omit for your own inbox.\nOr pass an agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run the call in that client's account, where none of the teammate limits above apply."New value: +"A teammate's email (one with team actions turned on), or an agency client's from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / as_teammate
      Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ],
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "Act on a consented teammate's inbox instead of your own — pass\ntheir email. Every action (label, archive, mark read, unsubscribe) runs\nagainst their mailbox. Gated on that teammate's act-on-behalf setting\n(stricter than conversation sharing); a teammate who hasn't granted it is\nrejected. Omit for your own inbox."
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / on_behalf_of
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Act on a consented teammate's inbox instead of your own — pass\ntheir email. Every action (label, archive, mark read, unsubscribe) runs\nagainst their mailbox. Gated on that teammate's act-on-behalf setting\n(stricter than conversation sharing); a teammate who hasn't granted it is\nrejected. Omit for your own inbox.\nOr pass an agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run the call in that client's account, where none of the teammate limits above apply."
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a write operation but not destructive. The description adds that it supports labeling, archiving, marking read, and unsubscribing, but omits side effects such as archive removing messages from the inbox while keeping them in the account, apply_label creating labels when absent, and unsubscribe requiring confirmation. Those details exist only in the schema, so the description adds only limited behavioral context.

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?

The description is front-loaded and wastes no space. The summary states the resource and main operations, and the returns note is useful given there is no output schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The rich schema compensates for much of the thin description, including detailed action semantics and requirements. However, the description does not cover routing versus siblings, mailbox/provider selection, or confirmation-sensitive behavior, and its return description is only generic.

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 the action enum thoroughly documents action-specific requirements and parameters. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb and resource: "Manage emails in the user's inbox," and names several supported operations. It is specific enough to identify the tool's domain, though "manage" is broad and it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like search_emails or get_emails.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to alternatives. It does not explain that email IDs likely come from search_emails, nor when to use search_by_label versus search_emails, leaving routing to inference from the schema.

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

All Sliq 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