Skip to main content
Glama
googlarz

Proton Mail Bridge MCP

by googlarz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_actionable_threads

Read-only

Rank mailbox threads by reply urgency, filtered to those needing action, to surface what requires your response during daily triage. Use pendingOn to see if the ball is in your court.

Instructions

Return mailbox threads ranked by reply urgency, filtered to those requiring action. Use for daily triage to surface what needs a response from you. Supports pendingOn filter to distinguish threads waiting on you vs. them. Prefer get_inbox_digest for a broader summary including stale items. Prefer get_threads for an unranked thread list.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoRequire a normalized label on the thread.
limitNoMaximum threads to return.
queryNoFree-text filter across subject, latest preview, senders, and labels.
offsetNoSkip this many threads (use nextOffset from the previous response to page).
pendingOnNoFilter by who the thread is currently waiting on.any
syncBeforeNoRefresh the local mailbox index from IMAP before ranking threads.
unreadOnlyNoPrefer threads with unread messages only.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.43
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Skip this many threads (use nextOffset from the previous response to page).",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. Addedv1.13.11
  3. Removedv1.13.11
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: results are ranked by reply urgency, pre-filtered to actionable threads, and the pendingOn filter distinguishes directionality. It does not mention cost/performance of syncBefore or paging return shape, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Four tight sentences with zero filler: purpose, usage scenario, parameter note, and two routing alternatives in descending priority. The most decision-relevant information (what it returns) is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, ranking behavior, filtering, and sibling routing. It is nearly complete, with the only gap being that return shape (fields per ranked thread) must be inferred from the schema-adjacent context rather than stated.

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 all seven parameters including the pendingOn enum are documented in the schema itself. The description only restates pendingOn's you-vs-them meaning, adding marginal value over the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return mailbox threads') plus two defining modifiers: ranked by reply urgency and filtered to threads requiring action. This is clearly distinguishable from the unranked get_threads and the broader get_inbox_digest, so an agent can select it without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly names the scenario ('Use for daily triage to surface what needs a response from you') and routes the agent away with two named alternatives: get_inbox_digest for broader/stale summaries and get_threads for unranked lists. When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both present.

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