msgraph-mcp

by jspv

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

delete_message

Delete an email message or move it to the Deleted Items folder using Microsoft Graph API.

Instructions

Delete a message or move it to Deleted Items. Requires Mail.ReadWrite permission.

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": {
      "message_id": "<message_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`permanent`	No
`account_id`	No
`message_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description mentions that the tool can either delete permanently or move to Deleted Items, which is key behavioral information. It also notes the required Mail.ReadWrite permission. However, it does not explain the role of the 'permanent' parameter or consequences of actions, leaving gaps for an agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points) that would improve readability for multiple behaviors.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite having an output schema, the description does not cover return values, error conditions, or the exact effect of parameters. The tool's dual behavior (delete vs. trash) is mentioned but not fully elaborated, making it incomplete for safe invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters. It fails to do so: no details on 'message_id', 'permanent', or 'account_id'. The agent cannot understand parameter behavior from the description alone.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action: delete a message or move it to Deleted Items. It specifies the required permission, which adds context. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like move_message, which may also handle moving messages.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as move_message or update_message. The description lacks context for choosing this tool over other message operations.

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