Skip to main content
Glama
rust-works

omni-dev

by rust-works
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

gmail_draft_show

Retrieve a Gmail draft by its draft id to get the current content, avoiding stale message ids that change on save. Returns YAML at the chosen format.

Instructions

Read one Gmail draft by its draft id (e.g. r-1234567890, the draft_id from gmail_draft_list). Use this rather than gmail_message_read on the draft's message id, which goes stale on the next save. Returns Gmail's drafts.get response: the draft id plus its message, rendered at format — minimal, metadata, full (default) or raw, the same values as gmail_message_read. When output_file is set, writes the YAML to that path and returns a short summary instead (always YAML, even for raw — not a decoded .eml). Read-only (gmail.readonly is enough). Mirrors omni-dev gmail draft show. Output is YAML.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNo`minimal` (ids/labels only), `metadata` (headers + snippet), `full` (default; parsed MIME structure), or `raw` (base64url RFC 2822 source) — the same values as `gmail_message_read`'s `format`.
accountNoSelects a named Gmail account instead of the ambient `--account`/`OMNI_DEV_GMAIL_ACCOUNT` resolution — e.g. `work`. Omit to use the resolved default account (or the legacy single-account credentials, if no named accounts are configured). Call `gmail_account_list` to discover configured names.
draft_idYesGmail draft id, e.g. `r-1234567890` — the `draft_id` field of a `gmail_draft_list` row. NOT a message id: a message id from `gmail_search` or `gmail_message_read` fails with "No draft with id". Required.
output_fileNoWhen set, writes the rendered draft to this path as YAML and returns a short YAML summary (path/bytes/format) instead of the inline body. Even with `format: raw` the file is the YAML envelope, not a decoded `.eml`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.44.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: declares read-only and gmail.readonly sufficiency, describes the drafts.get response shape and format rendering, and explains the output_file side effect including the YAML envelope even for raw format.

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?

Front-loads purpose and usage, but has minor redundancy: the output_file sentence and the trailing 'Output is YAML' duplicate the same fact, and the mirroring note is extra. Overall still dense and useful.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the critical context: purpose, alternative routing, return format, side effect of output_file, and required auth scope. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description largely repeats schema details (draft_id warning, format values) rather than adding new semantic meaning, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (Read) and resource (one Gmail draft) with draft id example. Distinguishes from the sibling gmail_message_read by warning that using a message id goes stale on the next save.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this rather than gmail_message_read on the draft's message id, and gives the reason (staleness). Also points to gmail_draft_list as the source for draft_id, so the agent knows how to obtain the required identifier.

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