apple-mail-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Apply reviewed mailbox changes

triage_apply

DestructiveIdempotent

Apply a reviewed email triage plan, optionally excluding specific message IDs, and verify retained messages. The plan is consumed once successfully applied.

Instructions

Apply one reviewed plan, optionally excluding selected envelope IDs, and verify the retained messages. A successful claim consumes the whole plan once.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`plan_id`	Yes	Triage plan ID returned by a planning tool.
`exclude_ids`	No	Envelope IDs from this reviewed plan to leave untouched. Omit or pass an empty list to apply the full plan. At least one message must remain selected.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.8.0Sep 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / exclude_ids

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Envelope IDs from this reviewed plan to leave untouched. Omit or pass an empty list to apply the full plan. At least one message must remain selected.",
+  "title": "Exclude Ids"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Aug 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds genuine context beyond them: the plan is a single-use claim consumed exactly once, exclusion IDs are left untouched, and the retained messages are verified afterward. It still doesn't say what operation is actually applied to the selected messages.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and closing with the single-use consumption rule. Every clause carries information; no padding or restatement of the title.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and annotations plus a 100%-covered schema handle safety and parameters. The description supplies the one-shot consumption semantics that the schema can't express, leaving only the nature of the applied changes implicit.

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 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema, including the empty-list and at-least-one-remaining rules. The description only restates the exclusion behavior, adding little beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('apply one reviewed plan') and adds the exclusion and verification scope, which separates it from triage_plan (which produces the plan). It never names siblings explicitly, so an agent must infer the pairing from context, but the operation itself is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'One reviewed plan' implies this runs after a review/planning step, but the description never says to call triage_plan first, or when to use triage_plan_delete versus this tool. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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