Skip to main content
Glama

mail_send_draft

Send a saved iCloud Mail draft exactly as written, then move it to Trash; if approval is required, queue it for the owner instead.

Instructions

Send a draft already saved in Drafts exactly as it stands (its own recipients, subject, body and attachments), then move the draft to Trash.

Use when: the owner has reviewed a draft and says to send it. Not for editing it first (use mail_update_draft, then send the uid it returns), composing new mail (use mail_send_message), or answering a message (use mail_reply_to_message). Parameters: uid and uidvalidity come from mail_search_messages(folder='Drafts') or from mail_update_draft's result; after an update the old uid is gone. Omit folder for Drafts; a message in any other folder must carry the \Draft flag or it is refused. From, Date and Message-ID are filled in when the draft lacks them. Behavior:

  • The same gates as mail_send_message: recipient cap, SEND_ALLOWLIST and owner approval (on by default).

  • Under approval it is queued, NOT sent, and the draft stays in Drafts until the owner approves.

  • A draft is queued once: sending the same uid again returns the entry already waiting (already_queued=true), never a second copy.

  • On a local server it returns already_a_draft and the owner sends it from Mail.

  • Once sent, a copy goes to Sent and the draft moves to Trash. Bcc recipients receive it without being shown to the others. Returns: status sent (recipients, message_id, subject, to, cc, saved_to, draft_moved_to_trash, or draft_left_in_place if the Trash move failed), queued_for_owner_approval (sent=false, outbox_id, approve_at: tell the owner; already_queued=true on a repeat), or already_a_draft. Errors: 'is not a saved draft', 'No message with uid' or out-of-date uids (search Drafts again), and the recipient and SMTP errors of mail_send_message.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYesThe draft's uid in Drafts (from mail_search_messages(folder='Drafts')).
folderNoWhere the draft is; default Drafts.Drafts
uidvalidityYesThe 'uidvalidity' from the result the uids came from (required: a renumbered folder is refused, not misread).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
      -  "additionalProperties": true,
      -  "title": "mail_send_draftDictOutput",
      -  "type": "object"
      -}New value: +null
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / uid / description
      Previous value: -"The draft's uid in Drafts (from mail_search(folder='Drafts'))."New value: +"The draft's uid in Drafts (from mail_search_messages(folder='Drafts'))."
  3. Addedv0.11.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only give the coarse safety profile; the description adds substantial context the agent could not infer: recipient cap, SEND_ALLOWLIST, owner-approval gating, queue-don't-send behavior, single-queue dedup (already_queued), local-server already_a_draft behavior, Trash/Sent copies, Bcc privacy, and auto-filled headers. Moving the draft to Trash is recoverable, consistent with destructiveHint=false, so there is no contradiction.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then cleanly segmented into Use when / Parameters / Behavior / Returns blocks. Long but every line carries operational value, and important routing info leads.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the three return shapes (sent, queued_for_owner_approval, already_a_draft) and the key error cases. For a gated, queueing, draft-mutating tool, the definition covers what an agent needs to call and interpret it.

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 100%, so the schema documents uid, folder and uidvalidity. The description still adds meaning beyond the schema: the provenance of uid/uidvalidity (from mail_search_messages or mail_update_draft), the warning that a post-update uid is stale, and the \Draft flag requirement for non-Drafts folders.

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 and resource ('Send a draft... in Drafts exactly as it stands') plus the side effect ('move the draft to Trash'), and immediately differentiates from mail_send_message, mail_update_draft and mail_reply_to_message. An agent can identify this tool's role without opening any 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?

Contains an explicit 'Use when:' clause and a 'Not for...' clause naming three alternatives with the routing condition for each. Nothing about when to select this tool versus its siblings is left to inference.

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