dead-letter

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Convert email folder

convert_directory

Batch convert all .eml files in a directory to Markdown, recursively mirroring subfolders to an output directory while leaving source emails intact.

Instructions

Batch convert all .eml files in a directory to Markdown.

Recursively finds .eml files (at most 50 per call; larger directories are rejected before any conversion). output_directory is required: Markdown is written there, mirroring subfolders, and source .eml files are left in place. Returns a JSON summary with total, successes, failures, output_paths, and errors. Each errors entry contains file and error_code (defaulting to conversion_error), never raw exception text.

Use convert_eml to retrieve individual converted file content.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`preset`	No	default
`dry_run`	No
`directory`	Yes
`thread_mode`	No	latest
`thread_order`	No	oldest-first
`include_raw_html`	No
`output_directory`	Yes
`strip_signatures`	No
`strip_disclaimers`	No
`embed_inline_images`	No
`include_all_headers`	No
`no_calendar_summary`	No
`strip_quoted_headers`	No
`strip_tracking_pixels`	No
`strip_signature_images`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.4.5Sep 30, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / output_directory / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / output_directory / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- addedInput schema / properties / output_directory / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- changedInput schema / required
```
Previous value: -[
-  "directory"
-]New value: +[
+  "directory",
+  "output_directory"
+]
```
First observedv0.2.4Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: the 50-file cap with pre-conversion rejection, that source .eml files are left in place, that subfolders are mirrored into output_directory, and that errors carry a file plus a sanitized error_code rather than raw exception text. That is exactly the operational context an agent needs before spending a large batch run.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then constraints, then output contract, then the sibling pointer — each sentence carries distinct information with no filler. Length is proportionate to a 15-parameter batch tool.

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 output schema exists, and the description still usefully summarizes the JSON summary shape, so return values are covered. However, for a tool with 15 options and an enum-based preset system, the complete absence of guidance on how the conversion options interact (preset vs individual strip_* flags) leaves a real gap.

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 0% across 15 parameters, so the description carries the full burden — but it only explains output_directory (required, receives Markdown, mirrors subfolders). The 12 conversion flags and 3 enums (preset, thread_mode, thread_order) are entirely undocumented, so an agent cannot tell what 'clean' vs 'verbose' preset or 'structured' thread_mode does.

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

Purpose4/5

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

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Batch convert all .eml files in a directory to Markdown,' which immediately separates it from the single-file convert_eml. It does not explicitly contrast with convert_mbox or convert_eml_to_bundle, so sibling differentiation is only partial.

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?

Gives concrete usage context (recursive .eml discovery, hard cap of 50 files with upfront rejection) and routes the agent to convert_eml for reading back individual converted content. It stops short of stating when-not to use it, e.g. for mbox archives, which is left to inference from sibling names.

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

Deploy Server