Odoo Claude MCP

google_gmail_send

Send emails or reply to threads by specifying recipients, subject, body, and optional CC/BCC or HTML.

Instructions

Send an email or reply to an existing message.

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": {
      "to": "<to>",
      "subject": "<subject>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "google_gmail_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cc`	No
`to`	Yes	Recipient email(s), comma-separated
`bcc`	No
`body`	Yes	Email body (plain text or HTML)
`html`	No	Send as HTML
`subject`	Yes
`reply_to_message_id`	No	Message ID to reply to (keeps thread)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only states basic action. Missing behavioral traits like auth requirements, error handling, or side effects (e.g., sent message stored).

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, immediately conveys core purpose. Perfectly concise.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no prerequisites mentioned, the description is insufficient. Lacks details on return value, required authentication, or thread behavior.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 57%, leaving parameters like cc, bcc, and subject undocumented in schema. Description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clearly states 'Send an email or reply' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like google_gmail_read and google_gmail_search by focusing on sending.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use google_gmail_send vs other email methods). No context or exclusion criteria provided.

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

Deploy Server