list_email_attachments
Retrieve the list of attachments associated with a sent email by providing its email ID.
Instructions
List the attachments of a sent email.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| email_id | Yes | The sent email ID |
Retrieve the list of attachments associated with a sent email by providing its email ID.
List the attachments of a sent email.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| email_id | Yes | The sent email ID |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds no extra behavioral details (e.g., that it returns metadata only, not file contents). No contradiction.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded, with zero wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given simple tool with one param and rich annotations, description is adequate. Could mention the return type (list of attachment metadata) but not strictly necessary since no output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema covers 100% of the parameter with a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states verb 'List' and resource 'attachments of a sent email', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_email_attachment and list_received_attachments.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Implicitly scopes to sent emails, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like list_received_attachments or get_email_attachment. Missing context about prerequisites or typical use cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/helbertparanhos/resend-email-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server