Skip to main content
Glama

delete_forwarding_address

Remove a configured email forwarding address from your Gmail account to stop redirecting messages to that destination.

Instructions

Deletes the specified forwarding address

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forwardingEmailYesThe forwarding address to be deleted

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function executes the tool logic by calling the Gmail API's users.settings.forwardingAddresses.delete method with the provided forwardingEmail.
    async (params) => {
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.forwardingAddresses.delete({ userId: 'me', forwardingEmail: params.forwardingEmail })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Zod input schema defining the forwardingEmail parameter.
    {
      forwardingEmail: z.string().describe("The forwarding address to be deleted")
    },
  • src/index.ts:1090-1101 (registration)
    Registration of the delete_forwarding_address tool on the MCP server, including description, schema, and inline handler.
    server.tool("delete_forwarding_address",
      "Deletes the specified forwarding address",
      {
        forwardingEmail: z.string().describe("The forwarding address to be deleted")
      },
      async (params) => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.forwardingAddresses.delete({ userId: 'me', forwardingEmail: params.forwardingEmail })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states this is a deletion operation, implying it's destructive, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, if the deletion is permanent or reversible, or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given this is a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial context like what the tool returns, error conditions, or side effects, making it insufficient for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'forwardingEmail' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format examples or constraints), so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 description clearly states the action ('Deletes') and the resource ('the specified forwarding address'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete_filter' or 'delete_label' beyond the resource type, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing forwarding address), exclusions, or related tools like 'create_forwarding_address' or 'list_forwarding_addresses' from the sibling list.

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