Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
macos-mail-mcp

macos-mail-mcp

by marius-cetanas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

send_message

Compose and send a plain-text email with optional CC, BCC, sender account, and attachments; returns queued status and sender, not delivery confirmation.

Instructions

Compose and send a new email message as plain text. Returns success when the message is queued for sending, along with the sender the message was sent from; actual delivery is not confirmed. Check Mail's Sent or Outbox mailbox to verify delivery.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ccNoCC recipient email address (optional)
toYesThe recipient email address
bccNoBCC recipient email address (optional)
bodyYesThe plain text body of the email
subjectYesThe subject of the email
fromAccountNoAccount to send from — a Mail account name ("Google") or one of its addresses ("you@gmail.com"), as reported by list_accounts. Matching is case-insensitive and an unrecognised value is an error, never a silent fallback. Omit to use Mail's default sending account; either way the account used is returned as `sender`.
attachmentPathsNoAbsolute paths to readable regular files to attach. CR, LF and NUL in paths are unsupported; invalid files fail before composing (optional).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / attachmentPaths / description
      Previous value: -"List of absolute file paths to attach (optional)"New value: +"Absolute paths to readable regular files to attach. CR, LF and NUL in paths are unsupported; invalid files fail before composing (optional)."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.3.2
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / fromAccount
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Account to send from — a Mail account name (\"Google\") or one of its addresses (\"you@gmail.com\"), as reported by list_accounts. Matching is case-insensitive and an unrecognised value is an error, never a silent fallback. Omit to use Mail's default sending account; either way the account used is returned as `sender`.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it discloses that success means 'queued for sending', that 'actual delivery is not confirmed', and how to verify via Sent or Outbox. It stops short of stating that sending is irreversible/unrecallable or what authorization the account needs.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the return contract, then the verification step. No filler and no repetition of the name or schema fields.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential gaps: what a success response contains (`sender`) and that delivery is unconfirmed. Attachment and account-selection behavior is left entirely to the schema, but overall an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so recipient, subject, body, cc, bcc, fromAccount and attachmentPaths are already well documented in the schema, including the fromAccount fallback and error behavior. The description only adds the plain-text constraint on the body, which is a marginal addition over structured data.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb+resource pair ('Compose and send a new email message') and adds a format constraint ('as plain text'). It does not distinguish itself from siblings like reply_to_message or forward_message, which also send mail, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the description of composing a new message; there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of reply_to_message or forward_message, which are direct alternatives in the sibling list. The only routing hint is about verification (check Sent/Outbox), not about tool selection.

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