Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-meta-inbox

mcp-meta-inbox

by pauloFroes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Get Message

get_message
Read-only

Retrieve a single message by ID, including attachments and shared media, to access attachment URLs shown in thread listings.

Instructions

Read a single message by ID, including attachments and shared media. Useful when a thread listing shows an attachment you need the URL for.

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": "get_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoComma-separated fields. Default: id,created_time,from,to,message,attachments,shares,sticker
message_idYesMessage ID (looks like "m_AbC123...").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds minor context about attachments and shared media, but does not disclose potential rate limits or authorization requirements.

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?

Two sentences, concise and front-loaded with no extraneous information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description is complete for a simple read tool with full schema coverage; hints at return content (attachments, shared media) despite no output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by clarifying the message_id format (looks like 'm_AbC123...') and the default fields for the fields parameter.

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 'Read a single message by ID, including attachments and shared media,' specifying the verb and resource, and distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_messages or get_conversation.

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?

Provides a concrete usage scenario: 'Useful when a thread listing shows an attachment you need the URL for,' giving context but without explicit when-not or alternative tools.

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