Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Hub

MCP Hub

by airano-ir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Gmail: Mark read

gmail_mark_read
Destructive

Mark a Gmail message as read by removing its UNREAD label. Use it to clear unread status for a specific message ID.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] Mark a message as read (removes the UNREAD label).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "site": "<site>",
      "message_id": "<message_id>"
    },
    "name": "gmail_mark_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
message_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds useful detail by naming the exact mutation (UNREAD label removal), but says nothing about required auth scope, whether already-read messages error, or side effects on threading/notifications.

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?

A single short sentence with the verb and effect front-loaded; every clause earns its place with no filler or repetition of the title.

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?

For a simple two-parameter mutation with no output schema and annotations covering destructiveness, the core is present. However, the undocumented "site" parameter and absence of any error or permission behavior leave meaningful gaps for correct invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for two required parameters, yet neither "site" nor "message_id" is mentioned or exemplified. An agent must guess what form "site" takes (domain, account, or endpoint).

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

Purpose4/5

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

"Mark a message as read (removes the UNREAD label)" gives a specific verb and resource plus the concrete state change, so an agent knows exactly what the tool accomplishes. It does not explicitly name the inverse sibling gmail_mark_unread, leaving that differentiation to the reader.

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 only implied by the stated effect: an agent infers it should call this when a message should no longer appear unread. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to the inverse tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools