Skip to main content
Glama
ongtungduong

VMail MCP

by ongtungduong
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

imap_send_email

Send new outbound email via an account's SMTP server, with to/cc/bcc, text/HTML, attachments, and a Sent copy unless disabled.

Instructions

Compose and send a NEW email via the account's SMTP server (a copy is saved to Sent unless disabled; account defaultBcc addresses are always BCC'd when configured). Use for fresh outbound messages. To respond to an existing message use imap_reply_to_email (keeps threading); to pass a message on use imap_forward_email; to store without sending use imap_save_draft. Supports to/cc/bcc, text and/or HTML, and attachments by base64 content or by file path (see imap_upload_file for large files).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ccNoCC recipients. Either an array of addresses or a single comma-separated string.
toYesRecipient email address(es). Either an array of addresses or a single comma-separated string; both accept "Name <addr@example.com>" form.
bccNoBCC recipients. Either an array of addresses or a single comma-separated string; merged with the account defaultBcc when set.
bodyNoAlias for 'text' (backward-compat with clients that pass 'body')
htmlNoHTML content
textNoPlain text content
dryRunNoValidate attachments and compose MIME without sending SMTP mail or saving a Sent copy. Use to diagnose attachment payloads safely before sending.
replyToNoReply-to address
subjectYesEmail subject
accountIdNoAccount ID (from imap_list_accounts). Optional if accountName is given or only one account is configured.
accountNameNoAccount name instead of accountId. Optional if accountId is given or only one account is configured.
attachmentsNoEmail attachments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden; it discloses the non-obvious side effects, namely that a copy is written to Sent unless disabled and the account defaultBcc is always injected. It doesn't discuss permissions, error behavior, or irreversibility of an SMTP send, which limits it to a 4.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then side effects, then sibling routing, then payload capabilities; no filler or restatement of the name.

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 12-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, side effects, and alternatives. Remaining gaps, such as dryRun validation semantics and account selection, are documented in the schema rather than missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema does the heavy lifting and baseline would be 3. The description adds value by summarising the addressing/content/attachment modes and by routing large attachments to imap_upload_file, a hint not present in the schema. It doesn't explain replyTo, dryRun, or account selection, so it stays below 5.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("compose and send a NEW email via the account's SMTP server") and explicitly separates this tool from the reply, forward, and draft siblings, so an agent can select it without opening another schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states the selection condition ("fresh outbound messages") and names three alternatives (imap_reply_to_email, imap_forward_email, imap_save_draft), each with the reason to prefer it (threading, passing on, storing without sending).

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