Skip to main content
Glama

Delete draft

delete_draft
DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes a draft created via save_draft, removing it from the mailbox. Refuses drafts already sent or unknown, ensuring only this deployment's drafts are removed.

Instructions

Gives up a draft this deployment holds and takes the copy of it back out of the owner's Drafts folder. The message the owner wrote is GONE and no call here brings it back, so ask the person you are acting for before deleting something they wrote. Nothing is sent by this call and nothing was ever sent by the draft: a draft reaches nobody. Only a draft this deployment created can be deleted, named by the draftId save_draft answered. A message the owner drafted in their own mail client is not one of them and is never touched. A draft that has already been sent with send_draft is refused too, in the same way a draft that never existed is: the message is a queued send that deleting the draft would leave running, and cancel_outgoing_email is what stops it. Asking twice is safe and the second call is refused as a draft this deployment does not hold, which is what a deleted draft is. The result says whether the copy left the mailbox with it: a mail server may refuse to give a copy up, and the folder a copy was put in may no longer be the one the account means by drafts — in both cases the message is left as the owner's to delete themselves, and nothing here touches it again.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
draftIdYesThe draftId save_draft returned for the draft you are giving up. A UUID that names nothing after this call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateYesWhat became of the copy in the owner's drafts folder.
draftIdYesThe identifier of the draft that was given up. It names no draft after this call, so a later call carrying it is refused as a draft this deployment does not hold.
Install Server

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description thoroughly discloses behavioral traits beyond annotations: it explains the destructive nature (message is GONE), idempotency (second call refused), and edge cases (mail server refusal, folder changes). It also clarifies that nothing is sent and drafts reach nobody. This adds significant context beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is a single, dense paragraph that is front-loaded with the core action and then elaborates on important caveats. While it is long, every sentence adds value by clarifying edge cases and safety considerations. It could be slightly more structured, but it is not verbose.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's destructive nature and the presence of an output schema, the description is exceptionally complete. It covers prerequisites (draft must be created by this deployment), exclusions (sent drafts, owner's drafts), error conditions (refused, second call), and post-conditions (result indicates success). No gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (draftId), describing it as the ID returned by save_draft. The description reinforces this by explaining that the draftId names nothing after the call, adding a subtle but useful semantic detail about the parameter's lifecycle.

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's purpose: to delete a draft that this deployment holds, removing the copy from the owner's Drafts folder. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning save_draft, send_draft, and cancel_outgoing_email, and clarifies it does not touch drafts created by the owner's mail client.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: only for drafts created by this deployment via save_draft, and not for drafts already sent (use cancel_outgoing_email instead). It also advises asking the person before deleting, and notes that asking twice is safe. This clearly differentiates from alternatives.

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

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/Krzysztof318/MailFathom'

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