Skip to main content
Glama

Microsoft 365 List Emails

m365_list_emails
Read-only

Use this when the user wants their Microsoft 365 / Outlook / Exchange inbox via the cloud — requires a connected M365 account (connect_m365_account). Returns subject, sender, date, and preview. For mail already in the Mac's Mail.app (including an Exchange account added there), use list_emails.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of emails to return (default 20, max 50)
folderNoFolder name: inbox (default), sentitems, drafts, deleteditems
unread_onlyNoIf true, return only unread emails

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo
emailsNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about requiring a connected account and returning subject/sender/date/preview. No contradictions; it complements annotations without being redundant.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with usage condition, then return summary and alternative. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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?

The description covers prerequisites, return content, and alternative tool. Combined with annotations and output schema, it is fully complete for a read-only list operation.

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 has 100% coverage for all three parameters (limit, folder, unread_only), so description need not repeat details. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, but baseline 3 applies since schema fully documents them.

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and clearly identifies the resource (Microsoft 365 / Outlook / Exchange cloud inbox). It distinguishes from sibling list_emails by specifying cloud-based access versus Mail.app.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when the user wants their Microsoft 365 / Outlook / Exchange inbox via the cloud'), the prerequisite (connected M365 account via connect_m365_account), and names the alternative (list_emails for Mail.app).

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct per app (e.g., chrome_*, safari_*, m365_*), but there is notable overlap between generic file tools like `file_list` and `finder_list`, both listing files; `search_contacts` and `list_contacts` serve similar purposes; `report_friction` and `report_problem` both send feedback to the team. The large number of tools with similar purposes in different domains creates moderate ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is very consistent overall: most tools follow a `{app}_action` or `verb_noun` pattern (e.g., `chrome_click`, `create_calendar_event`, `list_reminders`). There are minor deviations like `lmcp_install_upgrade` (two verbs) and `complete_omnifocus_task` vs. `complete_reminder` (inconsistent verb placement). Still, the pattern is predictable and readable across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

With 225 tools, the surface is extremely large and heavy. While it covers many distinct domains (browsers, mail, calendar, files, notes, reminders, video editing, web automation, etc.), the sheer number makes it hard to navigate and likely includes many rarely-used tools. This is far beyond the well-scoped range of 3-15 tools and feels excessive even for a 'local everything' MCP server.

Completeness3/5

For many app integrations, the tool set provides solid CRUD coverage (e.g., Calendar has create, read, update, delete; Apple Notes has create, read, update, list, search; OmniFocus has create, list, search, complete). However, some areas are incomplete: for example, there is no tool to create a new Mail folder or delete notes. The 'web' tools lack a clear update/delete for saved sessions. The suite is broad but has notable gaps within individual domains.