Local MCP

Thunderbird Send Email

thunderbird_send_email

Destructive

Sends a plain-text message from one Thunderbird account, through that account's own outgoing mail server, with the password the user stored for it in Local MCP (thunderbird_accounts_status says which accounts are ready). The first call returns a preview with sender, recipients, subject and body, and connects to nothing; confirm=true sends. For an IMAP account a copy is filed in its Sent folder, and the result says whether that worked. No attachments. An account that signs in through its provider (Google, Microsoft and others) cannot send this way.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cc`	No	Copy recipients, the same form as `to`.
`to`	Yes	Recipient address, or several (an array, or separated by commas).
`body`	Yes	Plain text.
`from`	No	The sending account: its id, name or address from thunderbird_list_accounts. Optional when the profile has one mail account.
`confirm`	No	Must be true to send. Without it the call returns a preview and sends nothing.
`profile`	No	Thunderbird profile name. Optional: the default profile is used.
`subject`	Yes
`remember`	No	With confirm: true, also stop asking for this kind of action from now on. Only when the person said so ("don't ask again"). The person can revoke it in LMCP or with set_always_allowed.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cc`	No
`to`	Yes
`body`	No
`from`	Yes
`note`	No
`status`	Yes	preview or sent.
`account`	No
`subject`	Yes
`sent_copy`	No	saved, not_saved or not_applicable (an account with no Sent folder on a server).
`message_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / remember

Added value: +{
+  "description": "With confirm: true, also stop asking for this kind of action from now on. Only when the person said so (\"don't ask again\"). The person can revoke it in LMCP or with set_always_allowed.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

AddedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: first call returns a preview and connects to nothing; confirm=true actually sends; IMAP accounts get a Sent-folder copy and the result reports whether that worked. It also discloses 'No attachments' and that provider-sign-in accounts cannot send this way, which are critical operational constraints for a destructive/open-world send operation.

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?

Four efficient sentences, front-loaded with the core action and transport, followed by the preview-confirm safety model, Sent-folder behavior, and the two hard limitations. Every sentence adds an operational fact.

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 destructive open-world send tool with an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: account precondition, preview/send gating, side effect of filing to Sent, attachment exclusion, and provider-account incompatibility. Return-format details are left to the output schema.

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 already high at 88%, so parameter docs carry most burden. The description still adds real meaning: it ties the sending account to thunderbird_accounts_status, explains the confirm/preview semantics, and clarifies that the result reports Sent-folder success. It doesn't add much about 'remember' or 'cc', but those are already described in the schema.

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 ('Sends a plain-text message from one Thunderbird account') plus the transport ('through that account's own outgoing mail server'). It clearly differs from sibling email senders by naming the Thunderbird account and its Local MCP-stored password, and the provider-sign-in exclusion further distinguishes its scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Usage context is clear: it points to thunderbird_accounts_status to see which accounts are ready, and explicitly excludes accounts that sign in through Google/Microsoft. However, it doesn't name a named alternative such as send_email or m365_send_email for those excluded cases, leaving that routing to inference.

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

All Local MCP 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.