Skip to main content
Glama

read-email

Read-only

Read an email by ID. Returns the full message body, subject, sender, recipients, and metadata as Markdown, or forensic headers for security analysis.

Instructions

Read a single email by id (read-only). Default: returns the full message body (HTML stripped to text by default), subject, from/to/cc, receivedDateTime, conversationId, attachments metadata, and webLink as Markdown. With headersMode: true: returns RFC-822 forensic headers instead (DKIM, SPF, DMARC, Received chain, Message-ID, Authentication-Results) — pair with importantOnly: true for the security-relevant subset, groupByType: true for category-bucketed view, or raw: true for JSON instead of Markdown. With includeHeaders: true (non-headers-mode): adds basic headers alongside body. Use outputVerbosity (minimal/standard/full) to control field count.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID of the email to read
headersModeNoReturn forensic headers instead of email content (default: false)
includeHeadersNoInclude basic headers alongside email content (default: false)
outputVerbosityNoOutput detail level (default: standard)
groupByTypeNoGroup headers by category (headersMode only, default: false)
importantOnlyNoShow only important headers (headersMode only, default: false)
rawNoReturn raw JSON instead of Markdown (headersMode only, default: false)
Behavior4/5

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation and adds behavioral details: default returns body as text, stips HTML, and explains the effects of headersMode, includeHeaders, and outputVerbosity. While thorough for a read operation, it omits potential error handling or authorization specifics.

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 structured with a clear opening sentence followed by well-organized paragraphs for modes. It is informative without being verbose, though some redundancy exists in explaining default behavior across sections.

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?

The description covers the main use cases (reading body or headers) and parameter combinations effectively. However, it lacks details on what each outputVerbosity level includes and does not address error conditions or edge cases like missing emails.

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%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds significant value by explaining parameter interactions (e.g., groupByType and importantOnly only apply in headersMode) and the effect of outputVerbosity on field count, which goes beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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 'Read a single email by id (read-only)', specifying the verb (read), resource (single email by id), and read-only nature. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like search-emails or export, which serve different purposes.

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?

The description does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search-emails or access-shared-mailbox. It focuses on parameter behavior but fails to contextualize usage scenarios or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/littlebearapps/outlook-assistant'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server