Skip to main content
Glama

untrash_thread

Restore accidentally deleted email threads from Gmail trash by providing the thread ID to recover important conversations.

Instructions

Remove a thread from the trash

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe ID of the thread to remove from trash

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:818-829 (registration)
    Registration of the 'untrash_thread' tool, including input schema and inline handler. The handler uses the Gmail API to remove a thread from trash by ID.
    server.tool("untrash_thread",
      "Remove a thread from the trash",
      {
        id: z.string().describe("The ID of the thread to remove from trash")
      },
      async (params) => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.threads.untrash({ userId: 'me', id: params.id })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • The handler function for untrash_thread tool, which authenticates via handleTool and calls Gmail's threads.untrash API.
    async (params) => {
      return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
        const { data } = await gmail.users.threads.untrash({ userId: 'me', id: params.id })
        return formatResponse(data)
      })
    }
  • Input schema for untrash_thread: requires a single 'id' parameter (string) - the thread ID.
    {
      id: z.string().describe("The ID of the thread to remove from trash")
    },
  • Shared helper function handleTool used by untrash_thread (and all tools) to manage OAuth2 authentication, Gmail client setup, API call execution, and error handling including auth-specific errors.
    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?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits like whether this restores the thread to its original location, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what happens on failure. It lacks details on mutation impact and response behavior.

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, direct sentence with zero wasted words, front-loading the core action. It efficiently communicates the essential purpose without unnecessary elaboration, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'remove from the trash' entails behaviorally (e.g., restoration vs. permanent deletion), potential errors, or return values, leaving significant gaps in understanding the tool's full context.

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%, so the input schema fully documents the single parameter 'id'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for adequate coverage without extra value.

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 ('Remove') and target resource ('a thread from the trash'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling 'trash_thread' by specifying the opposite operation, though it doesn't explicitly mention 'untrash_message' as a related sibling for comparison.

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 like 'untrash_message' or 'delete_thread', nor does it mention prerequisites such as the thread needing to be in the trash. Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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