Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

iOffice MCP

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

io_get_mail

Read-only

Fetch a single iOffice mail item by ID to inspect its content; choose compact or full response views.

Instructions

Get a single iOffice mail item by ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesMail item ID
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns iOffice's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which iOffice fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv3.2.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
  2. First observedv3.2.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them — no note on what happens for a missing/invalid ID, pagination, or read prerequisites. For a tool whose entire body is one sentence that restates the structured hints, this is a real gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, exactly sized for a simple lookup. It is arguably too terse to earn full marks but every word carries weight.

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 read tool with annotations covering the safety profile, a fully documented schema, and no output schema to explain, the definition is minimally adequate. It omits anything about what a mail item contains or how a missing ID is surfaced, leaving the agent to infer behavior, so it is adequate but with clear gaps.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%: the id and view parameters, including the compact/full enum semantics and the deliberate no-field-projection rationale, are fully documented in the schema. The description re-states only that the lookup is by ID, adding no syntax or default beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (iOffice mail item) and clarifies the scope is a single item by ID, which implicitly contrasts with io_list_mail. However it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from its sibling io_list_mail or the other io_get_* readers.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance is given. The agent must infer that this is the retrieval path when a mail ID is known and io_list_mail is the discovery path; neither condition nor any alternative is mentioned.

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