Skip to main content
Glama
churichard

Fluxmail

by churichard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

forward_email

Destructive

Forward an email to new recipients with quoted original body, 'Fwd:' subject, and attachments (unless disabled). Add an optional comment above the forwarded content.

Instructions

Forward an email to new recipients: quoted original body, "Fwd:" subject, original attachments included unless includeAttachments=false. Optional comment appears above the forwarded content.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ccNoRecipients, each "Name <a@x.com>" or "a@x.com"
toYesRecipients, each "Name <a@x.com>" or "a@x.com"
fromNoConnected address or an available send-as address
commentNo
accountIdNoAccount to operate on. Optional when exactly one account is connected.
messageIdYes
includeAttachmentsNoDefault true

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / from
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Connected address or an available send-as address",
+  "format": "email",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by spelling out concrete behavior: the original body is quoted, the subject becomes 'Fwd:', attachments are included unless includeAttachments=false, and a comment appears above the forwarded content. This meaningfully discloses what the tool does without contradicting the annotation.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core action, and every clause adds useful operational detail. There is no filler, redundancy, or schema repetition.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema and only destructiveHint as an annotation, the description covers the essential behavior, attachment defaults, and comment placement. It does not state the return value or explicitly confirm that a new message is sent immediately, but the forwarding semantics largely make this clear.

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?

Schema description coverage is 71%, and the description adds meaning for comment ('appears above the forwarded content') and includeAttachments ('original attachments included unless includeAttachments=false'). It leaves messageId and comment without schema descriptions, but the overall forward behavior and recipient emphasis make them reasonably inferable.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Forward an email to new recipients') and details the exact forwarding behavior: quoted original body, 'Fwd:' subject, and attachment handling. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_email or create_draft, even without naming them.

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 the use case through the word 'Forward' and the outlined behavior, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over send_email, create_draft, or update_draft. There are no exclusions or alternative-routing hints, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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