Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
apple-productivity-mcp

apple-productivity-mcp

by gambadio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

apple_mail_create_mailbox

Create a mailbox in Apple Mail by specifying a name; include the target account or use the default iCloud account.

Instructions

Create a mailbox in the selected Mail account.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "apple_mail_create_mailbox"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
accountNoiCloud

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.0.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on behavior when a mailbox name already exists, whether creation requires prompting, or what happens across multiple accounts.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriate for a simple create operation. It is efficient but perhaps too terse given the undocumented parameters.

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 output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description is far too thin: it omits required-vs-optional parameters, defaults, and error behavior (e.g., duplicate names). The annotations cover safety, but functional context is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for two parameters, so the description carries the full burden — yet it does not explain that 'name' is required, that 'account' defaults to 'iCloud', or the 1–1024 character constraints. It only vaguely alludes to an account without connecting it to the parameter.

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (mailbox) scoped to the Mail account, which distinguishes it from siblings like apple_mail_create_draft. However, it says 'the selected Mail account' while the schema exposes an explicit account parameter defaulting to 'iCloud', so the phrasing is slightly imprecise about how the target account is determined.

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?

No guidance on when to create a mailbox versus using an existing one, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., checking accounts via apple_mail_list_accounts), and no exclusions or alternative tools named. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools