Smartschool MCP Server

get_messages

Retrieve messages from any mailbox with filters for search, sender, and pagination. Choose to include full body content for detailed review, or just headers for a quick overview.

Instructions

Retrieve messages from the specified mailbox with filtering options.

Args: limit: Maximum number of messages to return (default: 15) offset: Number of messages to skip from the beginning (default: 0) box_type: Type of mailbox - "INBOX", "SENT", "DRAFT", "SCHEDULED", "TRASH" (default: "INBOX") search_query: Search in subject and body content (case-insensitive) sender_filter: Filter messages by sender name (partial match, case-insensitive) include_body: Whether to include full message body (default: False for performance)

Returns: Dictionary with messages list and pagination info.

Examples: - get_messages() -> First 15 inbox messages (headers only) - get_messages(search_query="homework") -> Messages containing "homework" - get_messages(sender_filter="teacher") -> Messages from senders containing "teacher" - get_messages(include_body=True) -> Full messages with body content

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`box_type`	No	INBOX
`include_body`	No
`search_query`	No
`sender_filter`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Sep 23, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "title": "get_messagesDictOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.2.0Jun 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses useful details such as include_body defaulting to False for performance, case-insensitive search and sender filter behavior, partial matching, and that the return is a dictionary with messages and pagination info. It does not cover auth or errors, but for a read-only listing tool this is solid.

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 well-organized with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and each sentence adds value, including compact examples that clarify common calls without redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a six-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers essential semantics, defaults, and return shape. It could mention error conditions or authentication expectations, but nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The input schema provides only types, titles, and defaults with 0% description coverage. The description compensates fully by explaining every parameter: limit, offset, box_type with the exact allowed values, search_query scope, sender_filter matching, and include_body's behavior and performance rationale.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve messages from the specified mailbox with filtering options.' It clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_courses or get_schedule, which concern different resources.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through the action word 'retrieve' and the examples, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternative siblings such as get_attachments or download_attachment. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server