Outlook Assistant

Send Email

send-email

Destructive

Compose and send an Outlook email immediately, using dry-run previews and recipient checks to prevent unintended communication.

Instructions

Compose and send an email immediately (destructive: sends external comms). Returns a confirmation. Safety controls: dryRun: true returns the composed message for review without sending; checkRecipients: true runs get-mail-tips first and returns its warnings. If the tips show an out-of-office reply, a full mailbox, a delivery restriction or external recipients, the send is refused until repeated with acknowledgeWarnings: true. Personal Outlook.com accounts return no tips, and no warnings is not proof of delivery. Subject to the session limit (OUTLOOK_MAX_SEND_EMAIL_PER_SESSION, else OUTLOOK_MAX_EMAILS_PER_SESSION; 0 refuses every send) and recipient allowlist (OUTLOOK_ALLOWED_RECIPIENTS) when configured; both refuse before any Graph request. For a review-before-send workflow, use draft (action=create → update → send); a draft can be checked in Outlook before it goes. Comma-separated recipient strings or arrays both accepted.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cc`	No	Comma-separated CC email addresses
`to`	Yes	Comma-separated recipient email addresses
`bcc`	No	Comma-separated BCC email addresses
`body`	Yes	Email body (plain text or HTML)
`dryRun`	No	Preview email without sending (default: false). Returns composed email for review.
`subject`	Yes	Email subject
`importance`	No	Email importance (default: normal)
`checkRecipients`	No	Check recipients with mail tips before sending (default: false). Out-of-office, mailbox full, delivery restrictions or external recipients refuse the send unless acknowledgeWarnings=true. Combine with dryRun=true for pre-send review.
`saveToSentItems`	No	Save to sent items (default: true)
`acknowledgeWarnings`	No	Send even though checkRecipients flagged an out-of-office reply, a full mailbox, a delivery restriction or external recipients (default: false). Without it those warnings refuse the send. Pass only after the user has seen the warnings. No effect without checkRecipients.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv3.14.1Oct 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / acknowledgeWarnings

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Send even though checkRecipients flagged an out-of-office reply, a full mailbox, a delivery restriction or external recipients (default: false). Without it those warnings refuse the send. Pass only after the user has seen the warnings. No effect without checkRecipients.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / checkRecipients / description

Previous value: -"Check recipients for out-of-office, mailbox full, delivery restrictions before sending (default: false). Combine with dryRun=true for pre-send review."New value: +"Check recipients with mail tips before sending (default: false). Out-of-office, mailbox full, delivery restrictions or external recipients refuse the send unless acknowledgeWarnings=true. Combine with dryRun=true for pre-send review."

Changed2 schema fields changedv3.7.4May 5, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / checkRecipients

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Check recipients for out-of-office, mailbox full, delivery restrictions before sending (default: false). Combine with dryRun=true for pre-send review.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedv3.4.1Mar 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: the session-limit env vars, recipient allowlist enforcement, the refuse-before-Graph-request behavior, the acknowledgeWarnings gate, and the caveat that Outlook.com accounts return no tips and no warnings is not proof of delivery.

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?

Dense and front-loaded, with the destructive warning and primary purpose stated first, then safety controls, then the draft alternative. It is on the longer side with several env-var names, but nearly every sentence carries actionable information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, but the description states it returns a confirmation. Combined with the safety-control, refusal, and limit semantics, an agent has everything needed to invoke this 10-parameter mutation tool correctly.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-parameter logic the schema lacks: the interaction between checkRecipients and acknowledgeWarnings, that acknowledgeWarnings has no effect without checkRecipients, and that comma-separated strings or arrays are both accepted.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('compose and send an email immediately') plus the return behavior ('Returns a confirmation') and explicitly flags the destructive nature. It clearly differentiates from the sibling 'draft' tool by naming it as the alternative for review-before-send.

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?

Explicitly names alternatives and the conditions that select them: dryRun for preview, checkRecipients for mail-tip gating, and 'For a review-before-send workflow, use draft'. It also states when-not (warnings refuse the send until acknowledgeWarnings) and the allowlist/session-limit refusal conditions.

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

Send Email

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools