mailwarden

archive

Idempotent

Remove handled threads from the inbox during triage; use trash to delete or snooze to defer.

Instructions

Archive a thread (remove it from the inbox). USE WHEN: inbox triage — the thread is handled and should leave the inbox. DO NOT USE: to delete (use trash) or to defer to a date (use snooze). Pass threadIds (a list of up to 100) instead of threadId to apply the same change to every listed thread in one call — for 'exactly these threads, as approved'. The answer then reports per thread: changed, failed (with code and message; the others still ran) and notAttempted (the run stopped at a rate limit, dead token or missing scope, which would have hit every remaining thread alike); ok is true only when all were changed. SIDE EFFECTS: thread leaves the inbox; reversible via modify_labels add INBOX.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "archive"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`threadId`	No
`threadIds`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`failed`	No
`changed`	No
`notAttempted`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.25.0Oct 29, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

addedInput schema / properties / threadIds

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "threadId"
-]
```

addedOutput schema / properties / changed

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / failed

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "code": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "message": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "retryable": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "threadId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "threadId",
+      "code",
+      "message",
+      "retryable"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / notAttempted

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedv0.1.8Jul 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond annotations by disclosing the reversible side effect and the exact undo path ('modify_labels add INBOX'), plus partial-failure semantics (changed/failed/notAttempted, ok only when all changed) and the causes that stop a run (rate limit, dead token, missing scope). This is consistent with idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false since the change is reversible.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then gating rules, then parameter guidance, then effects — a sensible order with no filler. The detailed per-thread return breakdown is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, so a little length is not fully earned.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter mutation with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering returns, the description supplies the missing pieces: reversibility, batch limits, and failure modes. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is absent.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does for threadIds: batch semantics, the 100-item cap, and the 'instead of threadId' routing. It never states that threadId is a single-thread alternative in equivalent terms, and with zero required parameters it leaves the one-of relationship implicit rather than explicit.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Archive a thread') and immediately clarifies the concrete effect ('remove it from the inbox'), which disambiguates it from trash and snooze by name. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit USE WHEN ('inbox triage — the thread is handled and should leave the inbox') and DO NOT USE clauses routing to two named siblings (trash for delete, snooze for deferral). No inference required.

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