Skip to main content
Glama
mpalermiti

outlook-mcp

by mpalermiti
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

outlook_list_thread

Read-only

Lists all messages in an Outlook conversation thread in chronological order using a conversation_id, with an optional concise mode to reduce token use on long reply chains.

Instructions

List all messages in a conversation thread, chronological order.

Needs conversation_id from a message's metadata. Pass concise=True to drop large fields (quoted prior-message text in each preview) — ~10x fewer tokens on long reply chains.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo
conciseNo
conversation_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.30.2
    • removedInput schema / properties / concise / title
      Removed value: -"Concise"
    • removedInput schema / properties / conversation_id / title
      Removed value: -"Conversation Id"
    • removedInput schema / properties / count / title
      Removed value: -"Count"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"outlook_list_threadArguments"
  2. First observedv1.11.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context: chronological ordering and the token-saving effect of concise=True, which drops quoted prior-message text from previews.

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 short, front-loaded, and wastes no words. The prerequisite and the important concise flag are both easy to find.

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 read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the key usage context, required identifier source, and concise mode. The main gap is the undocumented count parameter, but the definition is otherwise sufficient to call the tool 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains where conversation_id comes from and what concise does, but it does not explain the count parameter or its default behavior.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: list all messages in a conversation thread, returned in chronological order. This clearly distinguishes it from reading a single message or listing an inbox.

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?

It states a clear prerequisite: the conversation_id must come from a message's metadata. It also gives guidance on using concise=True for long reply chains, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases.

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