Skip to main content
Glama
0x8687

Meme MCP Server

by 0x8687

reply-to-email

Send a reply to an existing email by providing the email ID and your message content.

Instructions

Reply to an existing email

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailIdYesThe ID of the email to reply to
messageYesThe reply message content

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the core logic for the 'reply-to-email' tool. It uses the VercelAIToolSet (Composio) to execute the 'GMAIL_REPLY_TO_EMAIL' action with the provided emailId and message.
    }, async (args, extra) => {
        try {
            const userAddress = "default-user";
            
            const result = await toolset.executeAction({
                action: "GMAIL_REPLY_TO_EMAIL",
                entityId: userAddress,
                params: args
            });
            
            if (result.successful) {
                return {
                    content: [{ 
                        type: "text", 
                        text: `✅ Reply sent successfully!\n\nYour reply has been sent to the original email thread.` 
                    }],
                };
            } else {
                return {
                    content: [{ 
                        type: "text", 
                        text: `❌ Failed to send reply: ${result.error || 'Unknown error'}` 
                    }],
                };
            }
        } catch (error) {
            console.error('Error sending reply:', error);
            return {
                content: [{ 
                    type: "text", 
                    text: `Error sending reply: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}` 
                }],
            };
        }
    });
  • Zod input schema defining the parameters for the 'reply-to-email' tool: emailId (string) and message (string).
    emailId: z.string().describe("The ID of the email to reply to"),
    message: z.string().describe("The reply message content"),
  • src/tools.ts:203-240 (registration)
    The server.tool call that registers the 'reply-to-email' tool on the MCP server, including schema and inline handler function.
    server.tool("reply-to-email", "Reply to an existing email", {
        emailId: z.string().describe("The ID of the email to reply to"),
        message: z.string().describe("The reply message content"),
    }, async (args, extra) => {
        try {
            const userAddress = "default-user";
            
            const result = await toolset.executeAction({
                action: "GMAIL_REPLY_TO_EMAIL",
                entityId: userAddress,
                params: args
            });
            
            if (result.successful) {
                return {
                    content: [{ 
                        type: "text", 
                        text: `✅ Reply sent successfully!\n\nYour reply has been sent to the original email thread.` 
                    }],
                };
            } else {
                return {
                    content: [{ 
                        type: "text", 
                        text: `❌ Failed to send reply: ${result.error || 'Unknown error'}` 
                    }],
                };
            }
        } catch (error) {
            console.error('Error sending reply:', error);
            return {
                content: [{ 
                    type: "text", 
                    text: `Error sending reply: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}` 
                }],
            };
        }
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention if this is a mutation (likely yes), permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens upon execution (e.g., sends immediately vs. creates draft). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that modifies data.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it's overly concise, bordering on under-specified for a mutation tool, which slightly reduces its effectiveness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of an email reply tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, error conditions, or return values, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters (emailId and message). The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format details or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Reply to an existing email' clearly states the action (reply) and resource (email), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'forward-email' or 'send-email'. It lacks specificity about what 'reply' entails (e.g., replying to sender vs. all recipients).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'forward-email' or 'send-email', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing email ID). The description implies usage but offers no explicit context or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/0x8687/mcp-gmail-v1'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server