Fetch a message's plain text body using its ID. Optionally set folder or account to read from a specific mailbox.
Read an email message body (plain text). Use the ID from list_emails or search_emails.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Email message ID | |
| folder | No | Folder name (default: INBOX) | |
| account | No | Account name (uses default if omitted) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it reads plain text, but does not disclose error behavior, whether it modifies anything, or limitations beyond plain text. Adequate but minimal.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with clear, front-loaded action. Every word is functional.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema, so description should hint at return value. It mentions 'plain text' but doesn't specify if headers or metadata are included. Lacks detail compared to sibling 'read_email_html'. Adequate but incomplete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, each parameter has a description. The description only adds the note about using ID from list_emails. Adds marginal value beyond schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states verb 'read' and resource 'email message body (plain text)'. Distinguishes from 'read_email_html' by specifying plain text. Tells source of ID.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Clearly states to use ID from list_emails or search_emails. Provides context for when to use this tool, but lacks explicit exclusions or comparison with sibling tools like read_email_html.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.