Skip to main content
Glama

get_forwarding_address

Retrieve a specific email forwarding address configured in Gmail to view its settings and verify forwarding rules.

Instructions

Gets the specified forwarding address

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forwardingEmailYesThe forwarding address to be retrieved

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:1103-1114 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_forwarding_address' tool using server.tool(), including description, input schema, and inline handler function that calls the Gmail API to get the specified forwarding address.
    server.tool("get_forwarding_address",
      "Gets the specified forwarding address",
      {
        forwardingEmail: z.string().describe("The forwarding address to be retrieved")
      },
      async (params) => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.forwardingAddresses.get({ userId: 'me', forwardingEmail: params.forwardingEmail })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • The handler function for get_forwarding_address tool. It uses handleTool to authenticate and call Gmail API's users.settings.forwardingAddresses.get with the provided forwardingEmail.
    async (params) => {
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.forwardingAddresses.get({ userId: 'me', forwardingEmail: params.forwardingEmail })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Input schema for get_forwarding_address tool: requires 'forwardingEmail' as a string.
    {
      forwardingEmail: z.string().describe("The forwarding address to be retrieved")
    },
  • Shared helper function handleTool used by get_forwarding_address and other tools for OAuth authentication, Gmail client creation, API call execution, and error handling.
    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 formatResponse used to format the API response as MCP content.
    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 the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Gets' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify if this requires specific permissions, what data is returned (e.g., status, configuration), or potential errors (e.g., if the address doesn't exist). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse. However, it's front-loaded but overly terse, potentially sacrificing clarity for brevity. It could benefit from slightly more detail without losing conciseness.

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 the complexity of a retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'gets' returns (e.g., a JSON object with fields like status or creation date), error conditions, or how it fits into broader workflows. This leaves the agent guessing about the tool's full context and usage.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'forwardingEmail' documented as 'The forwarding address to be retrieved'. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Gets the specified forwarding address' clearly states the verb ('Gets') and resource ('forwarding address'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_auto_forwarding' or 'get_delegate' beyond the resource name, and it's somewhat vague about what 'gets' entails (e.g., retrieves details vs. just existence).

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., if the forwarding address must exist), contrast with 'list_forwarding_addresses' for bulk retrieval, or specify use cases. Without such context, the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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