hotmail-mcp

by oshann

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

list_backups

List all rule snapshots and recent message moves that can be undone.

Instructions

List everything that can be undone. Read-only.

Covers both kinds of history: rule snapshots (restore with restore_rules) and message moves (reverse with restore_message).

Args: move_limit: How many recent moves to include. Default 25.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_backups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`move_limit`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It declares 'Read-only', a key behavioral trait. It does not mention other traits like rate limits, auth needs, or pagination, but for a simple list tool the disclosure is adequate.

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: two sentences and an args line. The key point ('List everything that can be undone. Read-only.') is front-loaded. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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?

With no output schema and only one parameter, the description explains what the tool lists and the two categories. It does not describe the return format or explicit limits (beyond `move_limit`), but for a straightforward list operation this is largely sufficient.

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?

The schema has 0% coverage and only one parameter (`move_limit`). The description explains it as 'How many recent moves to include' and notes the default 25, adding meaning beyond the schema's type/default. This compensates well for the lack of schema documentation.

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 explicitly states it lists 'everything that can be undone' and clarifies it covers 'rule snapshots' and 'message moves', linking to specific restore tools (`restore_rules`, `restore_message`). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like `restore_rules` or `list_moves`.

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?

The description states 'Read-only' indicating safe usage, and names alternatives for acting on the listed items (`restore_rules`, `restore_message`). It does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool, but the context is clear enough.

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