AgentMail
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| AGENT_MAIL_API_KEY | Yes | Your AgentMail API key |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| listInboxesC | List all inboxes |
| getInboxC | Get inbox by ID |
| createInboxD | Create a new inbox |
| listThreadsC | List threads by inbox ID |
| getThreadC | Get thread by ID |
| listMessagesD | List messages |
| getMessageC | Get message by ID |
| getAttachmentC | Get attachment by ID |
| sendMessageD | Send a message |
| replyToMessageD | Reply to a message |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 10 tools
Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose targeting specific resources and actions. For example, createInbox vs. getInbox vs. listInboxes are distinct operations on inboxes, and getMessage vs. sendMessage vs. replyToMessage handle different message interactions. There is no ambiguity or overlap in functionality.
The naming follows a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout, such as createInbox, getInbox, listInboxes, sendMessage, and replyToMessage. However, there is a minor deviation with getAttachment (using 'get' instead of a more specific verb like 'download' or 'retrieve'), but overall the pattern is predictable and readable.
With 10 tools, this server is well-scoped for an email/communication domain. Each tool earns its place by covering essential operations like inbox management, message handling, and threading, without being overly sparse or bloated. The count aligns well with typical MCP server ranges.
The tool surface provides strong coverage for core email workflows, including CRUD operations for inboxes, messages, and threads, as well as actions like sending and replying. A minor gap is the lack of tools for deleting or updating messages/inboxes, but agents can work around this, and the set supports most common use cases effectively.