Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
m365-organizer

m365-organizer

by Denovarix
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

mail_sender_stats

Identify top senders and domains in a mail folder, and set a scan sample limit to control how many messages are analyzed.

Instructions

Top senders and domains in a folder. sample limits how many messages to scan (0 = all).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "mail_sender_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNo
folderNoinbox
sampleNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that `sample` controls how many messages are scanned and that 0 means all, which signals a cost/performance tradeoff. However, it never states that the operation is read-only or non-destructive, nor anything about permissions or latency on large folders.

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 with the core behavior front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though bordering on under-specified rather than genuinely tight.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But for a three-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the definition leaves the meaning of `top` and `folder` and the safety profile undisclosed, which is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 three parameters, yet the description explains only `sample`. `top` (default 40) and `folder` (default 'inbox') are left entirely to inference from their bare names, so the description compensates for only about a third of the documentation gap.

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 the resource and output ('Top senders and domains in a folder'), which is specific enough to distinguish it from the folder/rule-management siblings. It lacks an explicit verb (count, rank, aggregate), so an agent must infer that this is an analysis rather than a listing tool.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the siblings. The only contextual note is about the `sample` parameter, not about tool selection.

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