Skip to main content
Glama
dipseth

google-workspace-unlimited

Reply to Gmail Message

reply_to_gmail_message

Send a reply to a Gmail message with proper threading, supporting HTML content and custom recipient modes.

Instructions

Send a reply to a specific Gmail message with proper threading and HTML support

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ccNoCustom CC recipients (when reply_mode='custom')
toNoCustom recipients (when reply_mode='custom')
bccNoCustom BCC recipients (when reply_mode='custom')
bodyYesReply body content. Usage depends on content_type: 'plain' = plain text only, 'html' = HTML content (plain auto-generated), 'mixed' = plain text (HTML in html_body). Original message will be automatically quoted
html_bodyNoHTML content when content_type='mixed'. The original message will be automatically quoted in HTML format. Ignored for 'plain' and 'html' types
message_idYesThe ID of the original Gmail message to reply to. This maintains proper email threading
reply_modeNoWho receives the reply: 'sender_only' = only original sender (default), 'reply_all' = all original recipients, 'custom' = use provided to/cc/bcc parameterssender_only
content_typeNoContent type: 'plain' (text only with quoted original), 'html' (HTML in body param with quoted original), 'mixed' (text in body, HTML in html_body, both with quoted original)mixed
user_google_emailNoUse 'me' or 'myself' for auto-resolution to authenticated user, or provide specific email address. If None, uses current authenticated user (auto-injected by middleware).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
subjectNo
successYes
thread_idNo
userEmailYes
replied_toNo
reply_modeNo
content_typeYes
cc_recipientsNo
to_recipientsNo
bcc_recipientsNo
reply_message_idNo
original_message_idYes
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are minimal. Description adds 'proper threading' and 'HTML support' but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or side effects. For a sending tool, more behavioral context expected.

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?

Single sentence, directly conveys main purpose. No unnecessary words; efficient and front-loaded.

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?

With output schema present, return values not required. However, description is sparse for a 9-parameter tool; it does not summarize the modes or highlight key parameters beyond HTML support.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond schema; parameters are well-described in schema already.

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 clearly states 'Send a reply to a specific Gmail message', specifying the verb (send a reply) and resource (specific Gmail message). It also mentions 'proper threading and HTML support', distinguishing it from draft or forward tools among siblings.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'draft_gmail_reply' or 'forward_gmail_message'. No when-not or conditional usage is mentioned.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dipseth/google_workspace_fastmcp2'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server