Skip to main content
Glama

manage-rules

Destructive

Manage Outlook inbox rules to organize emails by listing, creating, reordering, or deleting automated filtering rules based on sender, subject, attachments, and actions like moving to folders or marking as read.

Instructions

Manage inbox rules. action=list (default) lists rules. action=create creates a new rule. action=reorder changes rule execution priority. action=delete removes a rule.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNoAction to perform (default: list)
includeDetailsNoInclude detailed rule conditions and actions (action=list)
nameNoName of the rule to create (action=create, required)
fromAddressesNoComma-separated sender email addresses (action=create)
containsSubjectNoSubject text the email must contain (action=create)
hasAttachmentsNoApply to emails with attachments (action=create)
moveToFolderNoFolder to move matching emails to (action=create)
markAsReadNoMark matching emails as read (action=create)
isEnabledNoEnable rule after creation, default: true (action=create)
sequenceNoExecution order, lower numbers run first (action=create default: 100, action=reorder required)
ruleNameNoName of the rule (action=reorder required, action=delete alternative to ruleId)
ruleIdNoID of the rule to delete (action=delete)
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, indicating this is a mutable tool with potential destructive operations. The description adds useful context by specifying what each action does (create, delete, reorder), but doesn't elaborate on behavioral aspects like permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens when rules conflict. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 perfectly concise and front-loaded, using exactly one sentence to cover all four actions with zero wasted words. Each clause earns its place by clearly mapping actions to their purposes without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, multiple actions) and lack of output schema, the description provides adequate but minimal context. It covers the basic action purposes but doesn't address return values, error conditions, or the relationship between different actions. The annotations help with safety context, but more behavioral detail would be beneficial for this multi-action tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents all 12 parameters thoroughly with clear action-specific requirements. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning the default action and basic action purposes, but doesn't provide additional semantic context about parameter interactions or usage patterns.

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 purpose with specific verbs (list, create, reorder, delete) and resource (inbox rules). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'apply-category', 'manage-category', or 'folders' by focusing specifically on rule management rather than broader email or folder operations.

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 provides clear context by listing the four available actions and their purposes, which helps the agent understand when to use each action. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'mailbox-settings' or 'apply-category', nor does it provide exclusion guidance for when other tools might be more appropriate.

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-mcp'

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