Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Outlook Email MCP Server

Outlook Email MCP Server

by nhatho0001
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

delete_draft

Permanently deletes a draft email from Outlook. Provide the message ID to remove it.

Instructions

Xóa vĩnh viễn một email nháp.

Args: message_id: ID của email nháp cần xóa.

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": {
      "message_id": "<message_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
message_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'permanently deletes' a draft, which clearly indicates a destructive operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authorization requirements, or error conditions.

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 extremely concise with two sentences: one for the main purpose and one for the parameter. No extraneous information is present, and the purpose is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 param, output schema exists), the description covers the essentials. However, it lacks contextual cues like when to delete a draft vs. updating it, and it does not mention that the operation is irreversible. For a 'minimum viable' score, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The input schema has 0% coverage (no descriptions on properties). The description's 'Args' section compensates fully by explaining 'message_id' as 'ID của email nháp cần xóa' (ID of the draft email to delete). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 'Xóa vĩnh viễn một email nháp' (permanently delete a draft email), specifying the verb 'delete' and the resource 'draft email'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_draft, update_draft, and send_draft, which handle other operations on drafts.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a draft should be deleted rather than updated or sent. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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