Skip to main content
Glama

get_send_as

Retrieve a specific send-as alias configuration from a Gmail account to manage email sending identities.

Instructions

Gets the specified send-as alias

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sendAsEmailYesThe send-as alias to be retrieved

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for the 'get_send_as' tool. Authenticates the user via handleTool and calls the Gmail API to get the specified send-as alias.
    async (params) => {
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.sendAs.get({ userId: 'me', sendAsEmail: params.sendAsEmail })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Input schema validation using Zod for the 'get_send_as' tool, requiring a sendAsEmail string.
    {
      sendAsEmail: z.string().describe("The send-as alias to be retrieved")
    },
  • src/index.ts:1158-1169 (registration)
    MCP server tool registration for 'get_send_as', including name, description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool("get_send_as",
      "Gets the specified send-as alias",
      {
        sendAsEmail: z.string().describe("The send-as alias to be retrieved")
      },
      async (params) => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.sendAs.get({ userId: 'me', sendAsEmail: params.sendAsEmail })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • Shared helper function used by all Gmail tools, including get_send_as, to handle OAuth2 authentication, client creation, and API call execution with 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}` });
      }
    }
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. It states 'Gets', implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions (e.g., if alias doesn't exist), or response format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's purpose without redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse quickly.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple parameter schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks context on authentication, error handling, return values, or how this fits into broader workflows (e.g., with 'update_send_as'). For a tool in a complex server with many siblings, more guidance would help the agent use it correctly.

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 parameter 'sendAsEmail' clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's 'The send-as alias to be retrieved', so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting. No compensation is needed or provided.

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 ('Gets') and resource ('the specified send-as alias'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_send_as' (which retrieves multiple) and 'create_send_as' (which creates new). However, it doesn't explicitly mention the resource type (e.g., Gmail alias) or differentiate from 'get_profile' or similar getters, keeping it from 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 alias), contrast with 'list_send_as' for bulk retrieval, or specify use cases like checking alias details before updates. This leaves the agent to 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