Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-outlook-applescript

mcp-outlook-applescript

by hasan-imam
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

confirm_archive_email

Confirm an email archive request using a valid token and move the email to the Archive folder. Returns success or clear errors for invalid or expired tokens.

Instructions

Confirm and execute archiving an email using a token from prepare_archive_email. Moves the email to the Archive folder. Returns a success message. Returns an error if the token is invalid, expired, already used, or if the email has changed since the prepare step.

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": {
      "token_id": "<token_id>",
      "email_id": "<email_id>"
    },
    "name": "confirm_archive_email"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
email_idYesThe email ID to archive — must match the ID used in the prepare step
token_idYesThe approval token UUID from prepare_archive_email (e.g., "a1b2c3d4-...")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool moves the email, returns a success message, and errors on invalid, expired, already-used tokens, or when the email changed since prepare. This is helpful behavioral context, though it omits details such as permissions or reversibility.

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?

Three short, focused sentences convey purpose, action, success output, and error conditions without redundancy. The description is front-loaded with the primary purpose and uses minimal words.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the workflow, success/failure behavior, and token validity constraints. It leaves some gaps (e.g., no explicit mention of idempotency or side effects beyond moving the email), but overall it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 descriptions already explain both parameters (token_id as approval UUID, email_id must match prepare step), so the description adds little beyond reinforcing the token source. The 100% schema coverage means the description is not required to compensate, so 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?

The description clearly states the tool confirms and executes an email archive using a token from prepare_archive_email, naming the specific action (moves to Archive folder). It distinguishes itself from the prepare step and other confirm tools by referencing the Archive folder and the token workflow.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly instructs that the token comes from prepare_archive_email and describes error conditions, implying this is the follow-up step in a two-phase operation. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context of sibling confirm tools and the reference to the prepare step provides sufficient guidance.

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