Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Gmail MCP Server

Gmail MCP Server

by neutral-Stage
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

batch_trash_emails

Batch move Gmail emails to Trash by labeling them as TRASH and removing from INBOX.

Instructions

Move multiple emails to Trash at once by adding the TRASH label and removing INBOX.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ids": "<ids>"
    },
    "name": "batch_trash_emails"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYesList of Gmail message IDs to trash

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains the core action (label manipulation), but lacks details on side effects (e.g., reversibility, impact on other labels), permissions needed, or error handling.

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?

Single sentence, efficient, front-loaded with the purpose. No redundant information.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential action. Minor gap: no mention of return value or atomicity, but overall adequate.

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% and the schema describes the 'ids' parameter well. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Move multiple emails to Trash') and the mechanism ('adding the TRASH label and removing INBOX'). It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like 'trash_email' (singular) and 'batch_modify_emails' (generic).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'trash_email' for single emails or 'batch_modify_emails' for other modifications. Missing exclusions or prerequisites.

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