Skip to main content
Glama
Skeptomenos

google-workspace-mcp-advanced

by Skeptomenos

send_gmail_message

Send an email via Gmail with support for HTML content, CC/BCC recipients, and replying to existing threads.

Instructions

Sends an email using the user's Gmail account. Supports both new emails and replies.

Args: to (str): Recipient email address. subject (str): Email subject. body (str): Email body content. body_format (Literal['plain', 'html']): Email body format. Defaults to 'plain'. cc (Optional[str]): Optional CC email address. bcc (Optional[str]): Optional BCC email address. user_google_email (str): The user's Google email address. Required. thread_id (Optional[str]): Optional Gmail thread ID to reply within. When provided, sends a reply. in_reply_to (Optional[str]): Optional Message-ID of the message being replied to. Used for proper threading. references (Optional[str]): Optional chain of Message-IDs for proper threading. Should include all previous Message-IDs.

Returns: str: Confirmation message with the sent email's message ID.

Examples: # Send a new email send_gmail_message(to="user@example.com", subject="Hello", body="Hi there!")

# Send an HTML email
send_gmail_message(
    to="user@example.com",
    subject="Hello",
    body="<strong>Hi there!</strong>",
    body_format="html"
)

# Send an email with CC and BCC
send_gmail_message(
    to="user@example.com",
    cc="manager@example.com",
    bcc="archive@example.com",
    subject="Project Update",
    body="Here's the latest update..."
)

# Send a reply
send_gmail_message(
    to="user@example.com",
    subject="Re: Meeting tomorrow",
    body="Thanks for the update!",
    thread_id="thread_123",
    in_reply_to="<message123@gmail.com>",
    references="<original@gmail.com> <message123@gmail.com>"
)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_google_emailYes
toYesRecipient email address.
subjectYesEmail subject.
bodyYesEmail body content (plain text or HTML).
body_formatNoEmail body format. Use 'plain' for plaintext or 'html' for HTML content.plain
ccNoOptional CC email address.
bccNoOptional BCC email address.
thread_idNoOptional Gmail thread ID to reply within.
in_reply_toNoOptional Message-ID of the message being replied to.
referencesNoOptional chain of Message-IDs for proper threading.
dry_runNoIf True, returns a preview and does not send the email. Defaults to True.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to mention the crucial 'dry_run' parameter which defaults to true, meaning the tool by default does not send emails. This omission significantly reduces transparency.

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 well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples) and front-loads the main purpose. However, it is somewhat lengthy; could be more concise without losing clarity.

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?

The description covers most aspects but misses the dry_run default behavior and does not mention authentication requirements. Given the tool's complexity, these gaps prevent full contextual completeness.

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?

With 91% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema, such as explaining how thread_id, in_reply_to, and references work for proper threading. Examples further clarify usage.

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 explicitly states 'Sends an email using the user's Gmail account' and 'Supports both new emails and replies', clearly identifying the tool's function and distinguishing it from siblings like draft_gmail_message or send_message.

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?

The description implies usage for sending emails and replies via examples, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., draft_gmail_message) or when not to use it.

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/Skeptomenos/google-workspace-mcp-advanced'

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