Skip to main content
Glama
lobster-kit

mcp-server-lobstermail

by lobster-kit

List Threads

list_threads

Retrieve conversation threads for an inbox, grouping related emails by reply chains or subject matching. Returns newest threads first with pagination support.

Instructions

List conversation threads for an inbox. Threads group related emails by In-Reply-To/References headers or subject matching. Returns newest threads first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inbox_idYesInbox ID (e.g. ibx_...)
limitNoMax threads to return (default: 20, max: 50)
cursorNoPagination cursor from previous response

Implementation Reference

  • The actual implementation of the list_threads tool calls the inbox's listThreads method.
    const result = await inbox.listThreads({ limit, cursor });
  • src/index.ts:283-294 (registration)
    The list_threads tool is registered here with its input schema and handler function.
    server.registerTool('list_threads', {
      title: 'List Threads',
      description:
        'List conversation threads for an inbox. ' +
        'Threads group related emails by In-Reply-To/References headers or subject matching. ' +
        'Returns newest threads first.',
      inputSchema: {
        inbox_id: z.string().describe('Inbox ID (e.g. ibx_...)'),
        limit: z.number().optional().describe('Max threads to return (default: 20, max: 50)'),
        cursor: z.string().optional().describe('Pagination cursor from previous response'),
      },
    }, async ({ inbox_id, limit, cursor }) => {
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Excellent disclosure of grouping logic ('In-Reply-To/References headers or subject matching') and sort order ('newest threads first'). Missing only explicit 'read-only' safety confirmation and rate limit/pagination details, though cursor parameter implies pagination.

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?

Two sentences with zero redundancy. First sentence defines the action and resource; second explains domain logic (grouping) and sort order. Every word earns its place. Appropriate length for a simple list operation with 3 parameters.

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?

No output schema exists, but description partially compensates by specifying return order ('newest first'). Thread grouping logic is well-explained. Simple flat schema with 100% coverage means less descriptive burden. Missing only brief mention of what's in a thread object.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. Description reinforces 'inbox_id' via 'for an inbox' and contextualizes 'limit'/'cursor' via 'Returns newest threads first' (indicating paginated, chronologically-ordered results). Does not add format details or validation rules beyond schema.

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?

Specific verb 'List' + resource 'conversation threads' + scope 'for an inbox'. Uniquely distinguishes from sibling 'get_thread' (singular fetch) by describing plural listing action, and differentiates from 'list_inboxes' via the 'for an inbox' scoping. Also clarifies thread semantics (grouping by headers/subject) that distinguish from individual emails.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit when-to-use guidance or contrasts with siblings like 'search_emails' or 'get_thread'. However, the description implies usage by stating 'Returns newest threads first,' hinting at recency-based retrieval use cases. Lacks guidance on pagination strategy (when to use cursor vs fresh call).

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/lobster-kit/mcp-server-lobstermail'

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