OrgLines

Mail: Schedule send

mail_schedule_send

Destructive

Queue a letter to go out at a moment you name instead of now — 'send this Monday morning'. Same addressing as mail_send, including reply_to_message_id. It can be called back with mail_cancel_scheduled right up until it leaves. CONFIRMATION: this tool is PROPOSED, never performed directly. You get status='confirmation_required' with an action_id and a plan_token, and the write happens only after confirm_action.

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": {
      "body": "<body>",
      "send_at": "<send_at>"
    },
    "name": "mail_schedule_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cc`	No
`to`	No
`body`	Yes
`mailbox`	No
`send_at`	Yes	ISO-8601 datetime with a timezone, in the future.
`subject`	No
`attach_part`	No
`attachments`	No	Files to attach, at most 10 and 25 MB in total. Each item is EITHER {from_message_id, part} — an attachment of a message (id from mail_list_messages, part from mail_get_message) — OR {document_id} — one of the caller's own Documents. To attach a file you generated, store it with upload_document_base64 and pass the document_id it returns; raw file content is not accepted here.
`reply_to_message_id`	No
`attach_from_message_id`	No	Older single-file form of attachments: forward a file that arrived on another message.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructive/openWorld annotations by disclosing the two-phase confirmation contract: the tool is only proposed, returns status='confirmation_required' with action_id and plan_token, and the write occurs only after confirm_action. It also states reversibility (cancellable until it leaves), which annotations cannot express.

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 the core behavior, then the sibling relationship, then a clearly labeled CONFIRMATION block. A little prose flourish ('at a moment you name') but no sentence is wasted.

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 behavioral/confirmation half is complete, but for a 10-parameter mutation with no output schema and thin schema coverage, the description leaves most parameters unexplained and never says what a successful scheduling returns (e.g., a scheduled message id).

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 30% across 10 parameters, so the description should compensate, but it only references reply_to_message_id and defers the rest to mail_send's addressing rules. Nothing is said about send_at format expectations, attachments, cc, mailbox, or the legacy attach_from_message_id/attach_part fields.

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 ('Queue a letter to go out at a moment you name instead of now') and immediately contrasts it with mail_send, so the deferred-send purpose is unambiguous without opening the schema.

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?

Clear routing: use this instead of mail_send when the send time is not 'now', and it names mail_cancel_scheduled as the reversal path up until dispatch. It does not spell out exclusions (e.g., past times, mailbox scoping), which keeps it short of a 5.

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

All OrgLines 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?