protonmail-mcp-server

by mattias242

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Markera som läst

mark_email_read

Idempotent

Marks one or more ProtonMail emails as read in a specified mailbox by UID, with batch support for up to 100 messages.

Instructions

Markera ett eller flera e-post som lästa.

Args: uid: UID:t som sträng, eller en lista med upp till 100 UID:n ur samma mailbox mailbox: Mappen som UID:t kom från (obligatorisk). UID:n gäller per mapp: samma nummer i en annan mapp är ett annat mejl. Använd fältet mailbox från svaret av list_emails, search_emails eller get_email.

Returns: True när markeringen är gjord. Kastar ett fel om UID:t inte finns i mailbox (UID:n gäller per mapp) eller om Bridge nekar. Med en lista med UID:n blir svaret {"ok": [UID, ...], "failed": [{"uid": ..., "error": ...}]}: ett resultat per UID, i ett enda IMAP-kommando. UID:n som inte finns eller som Bridge nekar hamnar i failed medan de andra genomförs. Ett ogiltigt UID (inte heltal) eller fler än 100 avvisar hela anropet innan något ändras.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`uid`	Yes	Mejlets UID i mailbox, eller en lista med upp till 100 UID:n ur samma mailbox. Med en lista blir svaret {"ok": [UID, ...], "failed": [{"uid": ..., "error": ...}]}.
`mailbox`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed9 schema fields changedv0.4.0Oct 21, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / mailbox / default
```
Removed value: -"INBOX"
```
addedInput schema / properties / mailbox / maxLength
```
Added value: +255
```
addedInput schema / properties / mailbox / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / uid / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "maxItems": 100,
+    "minItems": 1,
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+]

addedInput schema / properties / uid / description

Added value: +"Mejlets UID i mailbox, eller en lista med upp till 100 UID:n ur samma mailbox. Med en lista blir svaret {\"ok\": [UID, ...], \"failed\": [{\"uid\": ..., \"error\": ...}]}."

removedInput schema / properties / uid / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "uid"
-]New value: +[
+  "uid",
+  "mailbox"
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / result / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / result / type
```
Removed value: -"boolean"
```

First observedv0.1.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description goes well beyond them: it documents the throw-on-missing-UID behavior, Bridge denial handling, partial-success semantics with one result per UID in a single IMAP command, and that an invalid UID or >100 items rejects the whole call before any change. That is exactly the destructive/atomicity context an agent needs.

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?

Structured with clear Args/Returns sections and front-loaded verb; every sentence carries operational information. It is somewhat verbose and the Returns block duplicates information already present in the output schema, which costs a point.

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?

For a batch mutation with two required params, the definition covers inputs, per-folder semantics, atomicity, partial-failure shape and error conditions — more than enough for an agent to call it correctly, even though the output schema already exists.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50% — uid is described in the schema but mailbox is not. The description compensates by explaining the per-folder UID semantic (same number in a different mailbox is a different email) and where to source the mailbox value, adding meaning the schema lacks.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Markera ett eller flera e-post som lästa') and clarifies the single-vs-batch scope up to 100 UIDs. The read/unread distinction is clear from the verb, though it never names the sibling mark_email_unread, so it does not fully earn sibling differentiation.

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?

Gives real context: mailbox is mandatory, UIDs are per-folder, and the value should come from the mailbox field returned by list_emails, search_emails or get_email — a concrete cross-reference to sibling tools. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., flag_email) or exclusions, so it stops short of 5.

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