Skip to main content
Glama

local-mcp

by com.local-mcp

Reply Email

reply_email
Destructive

Use this when the user wants to reply to an email that lives in the Mac's Apple Mail (message ID from list_emails/search_emails). Supports plain text or HTML body. For a Microsoft 365 message ID from m365_list_emails, use m365_reply_email. Pass account (from list_emails/search_emails results) to skip scanning other accounts and avoid timeouts on multi-account Macs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoPlain-text reply body.
accountNoAccount (from the listing) the message is in — pass it to skip scanning other accounts and avoid multi-account timeouts.
confirmNoConsent gate: the first call previews the reply; call again with confirm=true to actually SEND it.false
html_bodyNoHTML reply body. Takes precedence over `body` when both are given.
reply_allNoReply to all original recipients instead of just the sender.false
message_idYesId of the message to reply to (from list_emails/search_emails).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repliedNo
message_idNo

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already flagging destructiveHint=true, the description adds useful behavioral context: the tool scans other accounts unless the `account` parameter is passed, which can cause timeouts on multi-account Macs. It also notes support for plain text or HTML bodies. This goes beyond the annotation's simple destructive flag, though it does not detail the confirm two-step consent flow (covered by schema).

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 earning its place: purpose, alternative, and optimization tip. No filler or repeated schema details. Front-loaded with the primary use case.

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 fully covers the selection decision (Apple Mail vs M365) and provides key operational guidance (account parameter). Output schema and parameter descriptions handle return values and other parameters, so the description is complete for correct tool selection and invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining that `message_id` comes from list_emails/search_emails and that `account` should be taken from those results to skip scanning and avoid timeouts. This clarifies parameter provenance and practical usage beyond schema definitions.

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 explicitly states 'reply to an email that lives in the Mac's Apple Mail', providing a specific verb plus resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling m365_reply_email tool by explicitly naming the alternative for Microsoft 365 messages.

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?

The description gives clear when-to-use guidance ('Use this when the user wants to reply to an email that lives in the Mac's Apple Mail') and explicitly names the alternative for Microsoft 365 IDs ('use m365_reply_email'). It also offers operational advice about passing the account parameter to avoid timeouts on multi-account Macs.

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

All local-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

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.

Resources