apple-mail-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_folder

Create a new top-level folder in an Apple Mail account to organize and file emails. Idempotent—returns success if the folder already exists.

Instructions

Create a new top-level mailbox/folder inside an account. Idempotent — reports success if the folder already exists. Pair with move_matching to file mail by rule.

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": {
      "account": "<account>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Name of the new folder, e.g. "Newsletters".
`account`	Yes	Account to create the folder in, e.g. "iCloud". Use list_folders to see accounts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Aug 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals idempotency ('reports success if the folder already exists') and the top-level nature of the folder, which are meaningful beyond the schema. It does not detail permissions or side effects, but for a simple create operation this is adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The idempotency note and pairing hint are both relevant and concise. No filler or redundancy.

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 low-complexity tool with 2 required parameters, the description covers purpose, behavior (idempotency), and a related usage pattern (move_matching). It does not explain return format, but that's less critical for a simple create operation, and the 'reports success' phrase hints at the outcome.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema descriptions already explain both parameters ('Name of the new folder' and 'Account to create the folder in'). The description text adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Create a new top-level mailbox/folder') and the resource ('inside an account'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_rule by focusing on folder creation, and the phrase 'top-level' clarifies scope.

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?

The description explicitly pairs this tool with move_matching for filing mail by rule, giving a concrete usage pattern. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough since it's the only folder-creation tool among the siblings.

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