Skip to main content
Glama

delete_filter

Remove unwanted email filters from your Gmail account by specifying the filter ID to delete.

Instructions

Deletes a filter

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe ID of the filter to be deleted

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for the 'delete_filter' tool. It invokes the shared 'handleTool' helper to authenticate and call the Gmail API to delete the specified filter by ID.
    async (params) => {
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.filters.delete({ userId: 'me', id: params.id })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Input schema for 'delete_filter' tool using Zod to validate the required 'id' parameter.
    {
      id: z.string().describe("The ID of the filter to be deleted")
    },
  • src/index.ts:1040-1051 (registration)
    Registration of the 'delete_filter' tool on the MCP server, including description, schema, and handler.
    server.tool("delete_filter",
      "Deletes a filter",
      {
        id: z.string().describe("The ID of the filter to be deleted")
      },
      async (params) => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.filters.delete({ userId: 'me', id: params.id })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • Shared 'handleTool' helper used by 'delete_filter' and other tools to manage OAuth2 authentication, credential validation, Gmail client creation, and error handling for API calls.
    const handleTool = async (queryConfig: Record<string, any> | undefined, apiCall: (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => Promise<any>) => {
      try {
        const oauth2Client = queryConfig ? createOAuth2Client(queryConfig) : defaultOAuth2Client
        if (!oauth2Client) throw new Error('OAuth2 client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const credentialsAreValid = await validateCredentials(oauth2Client)
        if (!credentialsAreValid) throw new Error('OAuth2 credentials are invalid, please re-authenticate')
    
        const gmailClient = queryConfig ? google.gmail({ version: 'v1', auth: oauth2Client }) : defaultGmailClient
        if (!gmailClient) throw new Error('Gmail client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const result = await apiCall(gmailClient)
        return result
      } catch (error: any) {
        // Check for specific authentication errors
        if (
          error.message?.includes("invalid_grant") ||
          error.message?.includes("refresh_token") ||
          error.message?.includes("invalid_client") ||
          error.message?.includes("unauthorized_client") ||
          error.code === 401 ||
          error.code === 403
        ) {
          return formatResponse({
            error: `Authentication failed: ${error.message}. Please re-authenticate by running: npx @shinzolabs/gmail-mcp auth`,
          });
        }
    
        return formatResponse({ error: `Tool execution failed: ${error.message}` });
      }
    }
  • Helper function to format API responses into MCP content structure.
    const formatResponse = (response: any) => ({ content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response) }] })
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Deletes a filter' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't disclose if this is permanent, reversible, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., affecting associated messages). For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

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?

The description is extremely concise with just two words, front-loading the core action and resource. There's no wasted language, making it efficient for quick understanding, though this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a filter is, the implications of deletion, error conditions, or return values. Given the complexity of a delete operation in a system with many sibling tools, more context is needed.

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 100%, with the single parameter 'id' fully documented in the schema as 'The ID of the filter to be deleted'. The description doesn't add any parameter details beyond this, but with high schema coverage and only one parameter, the baseline is appropriately high.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Deletes a filter' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (filter), which is better than a tautology. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_draft', 'delete_label', or 'delete_message', which all follow the same 'delete [resource]' pattern without specifying what makes a filter unique.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing filter ID), what happens after deletion, or how it differs from other deletion tools like 'batch_delete_messages' or 'delete_thread'.

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/faithk7/gmail-mcp'

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