Skip to main content
Glama
faithk7

Gmail MCP Server

by faithk7
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Hybrid

get_smime_info

Retrieve S/MIME encryption configuration details for a specific email alias to verify secure email settings.

Instructions

Gets the specified S/MIME config for the specified send-as alias

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sendAsEmailYesThe email address that appears in the 'From:' header
idYesThe immutable ID for the S/MIME config

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:1247-1258 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_smime_info' tool, including inline schema definition and handler function that calls the Gmail API to get S/MIME info for a send-as alias.
    server.tool("get_smime_info",
  "Gets the specified S/MIME config for the specified send-as alias",
  {
    sendAsEmail: z.string().describe("The email address that appears in the 'From:' header"),
    id: z.string().describe("The immutable ID for the S/MIME config")
  },
  async (params) => {
    return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
      const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.sendAs.smimeInfo.get({ userId: 'me', sendAsEmail: params.sendAsEmail, id: params.id })
      return formatResponse(data)
    })
  }
  • src/index.ts:1253-1258 (handler)
    The handler implementation for 'get_smime_info' which uses handleTool to authenticate and call Gmail API's users.settings.sendAs.smimeInfo.get method.
    async (params) => {
  return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
    const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.sendAs.smimeInfo.get({ userId: 'me', sendAsEmail: params.sendAsEmail, id: params.id })
    return formatResponse(data)
  })
}
  • src/index.ts:1249-1252 (schema)
    Zod schema defining input parameters for the 'get_smime_info' tool: sendAsEmail and id.
    {
  sendAsEmail: z.string().describe("The email address that appears in the 'From:' header"),
  id: z.string().describe("The immutable ID for the S/MIME config")
},

Tool Definition Quality

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation ('Gets'), which implies it's non-destructive, but doesn't cover aspects like authentication requirements, error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the config doesn't exist. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words or fluff. It's front-loaded with the key action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (retrieving a specific config), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic 'what' but misses behavioral details, usage context, and output information, which are crucial for an agent to use the tool effectively without trial and error.

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 clear documentation for both required parameters ('sendAsEmail' and 'id'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the relationship between these parameters or usage examples. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance parameter understanding.

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 the target resource ('the specified S/MIME config for the specified send-as alias'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_smime_info' or 'set_default_smime_info', which would require more specific language about retrieving a single config by ID rather than listing or setting defaults.

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, such as 'list_smime_info' for browsing all configs or 'set_default_smime_info' for default settings. It lacks any mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and parameters.

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