Dove

Move messages

move_messages

Destructive

Move up to 100 messages by ID to a folder, label, archive, inbox, trash, or spam in a specified mailbox; IMAP moves return new IDs.

Instructions

Move messages to a folder (IMAP) or label (Gmail), or to one of: archive, inbox, trash, spam. Moving into Trash or Spam, or out of Spam, needs the delete permission; out of Trash only organize. Trash is recoverable; Dove never deletes permanently. IMAP message ids change on a move: use new_id. At most 100 ids per call. To mark read, star or label without moving, use update_messages.

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": {
      "account": "<account>",
      "ids": "<ids>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "move_messages"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	archive, inbox, trash, spam, or a folder/label name from list_labels.
`ids`	Yes	Message ids of this mailbox (from search_messages or get_message).
`account`	Yes	Mailbox alias or email address from list_accounts.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`failed`	No
`account`	No
`results`	No
`succeeded`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.11.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: per-target permission requirements (delete permission for Trash/Spam moves, organize to move out of Trash), recoverability semantics ('Trash is recoverable; Dove never deletes permanently'), the 100-id cap, and the critical caveat that IMAP ids change on a move and new_id must be used. The recoverability statement slightly tempers the destructiveHint but does not contradict it, since the move still mutates server state.

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?

Five short sentences, each carrying distinct operational payload (targets, permissions, recoverability, id churn, batch limit, sibling routing) with the core action front-loaded. No filler or restated title.

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 destructive batch mutation with three required params, the description covers side effects, permissions, limits, and the id-invalidation trap, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents all three parameters, including the 'to' value set and a matching maxItems of 100. The description largely restates those values; the only added meaning is the new_id post-move behavior, which is about the response rather than the inputs.

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?

Opens with a specific verb plus resource ('Move messages to a folder (IMAP) or label (Gmail)') and enumerates the special targets archive/inbox/trash/spam, so the agent can distinguish it from update_messages without opening a 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?

Explicitly names the alternative 'To mark read, star or label without moving, use update_messages,' which gives both the when-to-use and the when-not-to-use condition. Target values are also enumerated so selection is unambiguous.

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