Skip to main content
Glama
googlarz

Proton Mail Bridge MCP

by googlarz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_threads

Read-only

Return normalized email threads grouped by subject and participants, so mail can be reviewed as conversations. Filter by label or query and page through results.

Instructions

Return normalized email threads from the local mailbox index, grouping individual messages into conversations by subject and participants. Use to view mail as threads rather than individual messages. Note: searches subject and participants only — use search_indexed_emails to search body content. Prefer get_actionable_threads when you want threads prioritized by reply urgency. Prefer get_inbox_digest for an executive-summary view.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoRequire a normalized label on the thread.
limitNoMaximum threads to return.
queryNoFree-text filter across subject, participants, and labels.
offsetNoSkip this many threads (use nextOffset from the previous response to page).

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. Addedv1.17.0
  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 declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered; the description adds real behavioral context beyond that — it discloses the matching scope ('searches subject and participants only') and the normalization/grouping behavior. It omits pagination mechanics, though the offset param description hints at nextOffset.

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?

Front-loads what the tool returns, then use-case routing, then exclusions and alternatives. Every sentence adds distinct routing or scoping value with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description plus the offset/nextOffset param hint adequately convey the shape of a paged thread list. It covers usage and scoping well; only explicit return-format details are thin, which is minor given the paging hint.

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 four parameters are already documented. The description adds only marginal meaning, clarifying query is limited to subject/participants (though the schema also mentions labels), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 normalized email threads from the local mailbox index') plus the grouping semantics ('by subject and participants'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_emails and get_thread_by_id without requiring the 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 routes the agent: recommends itself for thread-view over individual messages, points to search_indexed_emails for body search, get_actionable_threads for urgency, and get_inbox_digest for executive summaries. Multiple named alternatives with selecting conditions.

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