Skip to main content
Glama

delete_thread

Remove email threads from Gmail by providing the thread ID to permanently delete conversation chains and manage inbox space.

Instructions

Delete a thread

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe ID of the thread to delete

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for the 'delete_thread' tool. It uses the shared handleTool helper to authenticate and call the Gmail API's users.threads.delete method with the provided thread ID, then formats the response.
    async (params) => {
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.threads.delete({ userId: 'me', id: params.id })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Input schema for the 'delete_thread' tool, defined using Zod. Requires a single 'id' parameter: the thread ID as a string.
    {
      id: z.string().describe("The ID of the thread to delete")
    },
  • src/index.ts:683-694 (registration)
    Registration of the 'delete_thread' tool on the MCP server using server.tool(), including description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool("delete_thread",
      "Delete a thread",
      {
        id: z.string().describe("The ID of the thread to delete")
      },
      async (params) => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.threads.delete({ userId: 'me', id: params.id })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • Shared helper function used by all Gmail tools, including delete_thread, to handle OAuth2 authentication, create Gmail client, execute the API call, and handle errors.
    const handleTool = async (queryConfig: Record<string, any> | undefined, apiCall: (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => Promise<any>) => {
      try {
        const oauth2Client = queryConfig ? createOAuth2Client(queryConfig) : defaultOAuth2Client
        if (!oauth2Client) throw new Error('OAuth2 client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const credentialsAreValid = await validateCredentials(oauth2Client)
        if (!credentialsAreValid) throw new Error('OAuth2 credentials are invalid, please re-authenticate')
    
        const gmailClient = queryConfig ? google.gmail({ version: 'v1', auth: oauth2Client }) : defaultGmailClient
        if (!gmailClient) throw new Error('Gmail client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const result = await apiCall(gmailClient)
        return result
      } catch (error: any) {
        return `Tool execution failed: ${error.message}`
      }
    }
  • Helper function to format API responses into MCP-compatible content structure by JSON stringifying the response.
    const formatResponse = (response: any) => ({ content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response) }] })
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Delete a thread' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent or reversible, what permissions are required, whether it affects associated messages, or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this lack of behavioral context is critical.

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 extremely concise with just three words ('Delete a thread'), which is appropriately sized for a simple tool. It's front-loaded with the core action, though this brevity comes at the cost of completeness. There is zero wasted language or redundancy.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given this is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'delete' means operationally, what the tool returns, error conditions, or how it differs from similar sibling tools. For a tool that permanently removes data, this lack of context is problematic.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage (the 'id' parameter is fully documented in the schema), so the baseline score is 3. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema already provides—it doesn't explain ID format, sourcing, or validation rules. The schema adequately handles parameter semantics.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Delete a thread' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without providing any additional context. It specifies the verb ('Delete') and resource ('a thread'), but fails to distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete_message', 'trash_thread', or 'untrash_thread' that also manipulate threads or messages. No specific scope or differentiation is provided.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing thread ID), exclusions (e.g., cannot delete already deleted threads), or comparisons to sibling tools like 'trash_thread' (which might move to trash vs permanent deletion) or 'delete_message' (which operates on individual messages). Usage context is completely absent.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/HitmanLy007/gmail-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server