himalaya-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

snooze_email

Postpone an email until a chosen time so it leaves the inbox temporarily and reappears for follow-up when the period expires.

Instructions

Snooze an email until a specified time. The email will reappear in your inbox check after the snooze period expires.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "snoozeUntil": "<snoozeUntil>"
    },
    "name": "snooze_email"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Email message ID to snooze
`folder`	No	Folder name (default: INBOX)
`account`	No	Account name
`subject`	No	Email subject (for display)
`snoozeUntil`	Yes	When to unsnooze (ISO format, e.g. 2026-07-08T09:00:00, or shorthand: '2h', '1d', 'tomorrow', 'monday')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.2.2Nov 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / id / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "minimum": 0,
+    "type": "integer"
+  }
+]

removedInput schema / properties / id / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

Addedv2.0.0Jul 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one important behavior beyond the schema: the email reappears in the inbox after the snooze period expires. However, it omits whether the message is removed from its current folder while snoozed, whether the action requires account permissions, and whether snoozing can be cancelled early.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. The second sentence is slightly redundant with 'until a specified time' but it adds the useful reappearance behavior, so it earns its place.

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?

For a five-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core outcome but leaves gaps: what happens to the email in the interim, how the folder and account parameters affect placement, and what the call returns. Adequate but not complete.

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 all five parameters are already documented, and the description adds no parameter-level detail. The phrase 'reappear in your inbox' slightly hints at how the folder parameter interacts with the snooze, but this is left implicit. Baseline 3 applies given the high coverage.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Snooze an email') plus a scope qualifier ('until a specified time'), which is clearer than a bare restatement of the name. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling list_snoozed_emails, which is the natural companion tool for inspecting or managing snoozes.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_snoozed_emails for reviewing or restoring snoozed mail. The only usage signal is implicit in the verb 'snooze'.

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