Skip to main content
Glama
littlebearapps

outlook-mcp

by littlebearapps
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

access-shared-mailbox

Read-only

List emails from a shared mailbox you can access, with paging and folder selection. Returns subject, sender, and received date.

Instructions

List emails from a shared mailbox the signed-in user has been granted access to (read-only). Returns paged messages from the named sharedMailbox (or alias email) and folder (default inbox) with id/subject/from/receivedDateTime/preview — same shape as search-emails list mode. Requires that the shared mailbox has been delegated to the signed-in user in Exchange (admin-configured). Use outputVerbosity to control field count and count (default 25, max 50) for page size. For full search/filter capability over a shared mailbox, prefer search-emails with a folder path scoped to the shared mailbox.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of emails to retrieve (default: 25, max: 50)
emailNoAlias for `sharedMailbox` (more intuitive name for the same value).
folderNoFolder to read from (default: inbox)
sharedMailboxNoEmail address of the shared mailbox (required)
outputVerbosityNoOutput detail level (default: standard)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv3.7.4
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / email
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for `sharedMailbox` (more intuitive name for the same value).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "sharedMailbox"
-]New value: +[]
  2. First observedv3.4.1

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses the return shape ('Returns paged messages... with id/subject/from/receivedDateTime/preview'), pagination behavior ('count (default 25, max 50) for page size'), the alias relationship ('sharedMailbox (or alias email)'), and the administrative delegation requirement. These details add substantial behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, with no contradictions.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph that front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently covers return shape, prerequisite, parameter usage, and alternative. Every sentence contributes unique value with no verbosity 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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, return fields, pagination, prerequisites, and relationship to sibling tools. It lacks only failure-mode details (e.g., what happens without delegation) and contains the minor required-parameter discrepancy, so it's nearly complete but not flawless.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that email is an alias for sharedMailbox, that count controls page size with default/max values, and that outputVerbosity controls field count. However, it also states sharedMailbox is 'required' while the schema has required: [], which is a minor inconsistency that prevents a perfect score.

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's function: 'List emails from a shared mailbox the signed-in user has been granted access to (read-only).' It identifies the specific verb (list), resource (emails), and scope (shared mailbox the user has access to). It also differentiates from siblings by noting 'same shape as search-emails list mode' and explicitly recommending search-emails for full search/filter, making its unique role clear.

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?

The description provides explicit usage context: it states the prerequisite ('Requires that the shared mailbox has been delegated to the signed-in user in Exchange') and gives an alternative for different needs ('For full search/filter capability over a shared mailbox, prefer search-emails with a folder path scoped to the shared mailbox'). This clearly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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