untrash_thread
Restore an entire email thread from Trash to your inbox by specifying its thread ID.
Instructions
Restore an entire thread from Trash.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| thread_id | Yes | ||
| account | No | ||
| password | No |
Restore an entire email thread from Trash to your inbox by specifying its thread ID.
Restore an entire thread from Trash.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| thread_id | Yes | ||
| account | No | ||
| password | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'restore entire thread' without detailing permissions, reversibility, or side effects. Minimal transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely short but under-specifies the tool. It lacks essential details, making it insufficient despite being concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 3 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is highly incomplete. It fails to cover return values, errors, or prerequisites.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description fails to explain the parameters. The role of 'account' and 'password' is unclear, leaving the agent guessing.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action 'restore' on the resource 'thread' and specifies 'from Trash'. It differentiates from siblings like untrash_message and trash_thread.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch_untrash or untrash_message. The description only states the action without context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/eitan3/Gmail_MCP'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server