Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
proton-bridge-mcp

proton-bridge-mcp

by Considus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Save an attachment

save_attachment
Idempotent

Write email attachments to disk and return the saved file paths. Handles images, scanned PDFs, and other non-text content. Files self-delete after a short time by default.

Instructions

Write attachment(s) to disk and return the path(s). Use for images, scanned PDFs, or anything not text-extractable. EPHEMERAL by default — files self-delete after the TTL.

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": {
      "uid": "<uid>"
    },
    "name": "save_attachment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYes
folderNoDefault INBOX.
dry_runNoPreview exactly what would happen and change nothing. Needs no confirmation.
persistNoKeep the file permanently. Default false = auto-deleted after the TTL so nothing lingers for the user to open by accident.
dest_dirNoSub-path under the attachments dir. Writes outside it are refused.
filenameNoPartial match; omit to save all documents.
uidvalidityNoUIDVALIDITY reported alongside the uid. Pass it back so a mailbox resync cannot make this act on the wrong message.
include_inlineNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that files are EPHEMERAL by default and self-delete after the TTL, which is important behavioral context beyond the annotations' readOnlyHint and destructiveHint flags. This adds transparency about the tool's lifecycle behavior and potential surprise to users.

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?

The description is three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, followed by the intended use and the critical ephemeral behavior. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return value (path(s)) and a key behavioral caveat (self-deletion). It doesn't enumerate error scenarios, but the schema covers parameter-level details, making the description sufficient as an overview.

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 75%, so most parameters already have descriptions. The tool description doesn't re-explain parameters, and it also doesn't clarify the undocumented uid and include_inline fields; however, these are reasonably inferable from their names and context.

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 clearly states the tool writes attachment(s) to disk and returns the path(s), using a specific verb and resource. It also gives concrete use cases (images, scanned PDFs, anything not text-extractable) that distinguish it from siblings like read_attachment and view_attachment.

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?

The description explicitly says to use for images, scanned PDFs, or anything not text-extractable, giving a clear when-to-use signal. It does not name alternative tools but implies that text-extractable content is handled elsewhere, which is adequate guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools