MCP Aruba Email & Calendar Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_emails

Retrieve email summaries from a chosen folder, optionally filtered by sender address and capped by a limit. Use it to scan inbox or folder contents and preview messages before reading.

Instructions

List emails from the specified folder.

Args: folder: Mail folder to list from (default: INBOX) sender_filter: Optional filter by sender email address (e.g., "denisa@c-tic.it") limit: Maximum number of emails to return (default: 10, max: 50)

Returns: List of email summaries with id, from, to, subject, date, and body preview

Example: list_emails(sender_filter="denisa@c-tic.it", limit=5)

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": "list_emails"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`folder`	No	INBOX
`sender_filter`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden: it discloses the return shape (id, from, to, subject, date, body preview), the default page size and the maximum of 50, which are genuine behavioral facts. It stops short of stating pagination/ordering behavior, whether the body preview is truncated, or whether unattached folders error, so read-only safety and limits are only partially covered.

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 the core action, then Args/Returns/Example in a predictable structure. The Args block partly restates schema titles, but the defaults, the max-50 bound and the example all earn their place, so there is little waste.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a three-optional-parameter listing tool with no annotations and an output schema present, the description covers the key gaps: parameter meaning, defaults, limits, and an example call. The Returns block is partially redundant with the output schema, and the missing sibling comparison is the main residual gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: folder default INBOX, sender_filter as an optional address filter with a format example, and limit default 10 with a max of 50 (a constraint absent from the schema). Only sender_filter's matching semantics (exact vs substring) remain ambiguous.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first line states a specific verb and resource ('List emails') plus the scope ('from the specified folder'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling search_emails, which overlaps with the sender_filter capability.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the folder-focused framing and the example suggest browsing a folder, but the description never says when to prefer this over search_emails or read_email, nor any exclusions. The example line gives a concrete call pattern but not decision guidance.

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