apple-mail-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to apple-mail-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that gives AI assistants full access to Apple Mail -- read, search, compose, organize, and analyze emails via natural language.38MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceThis MCP server bridges AI agents with Apple Mail on macOS, enabling email operations like reading, sending, drafting, searching, and scheduling through natural language, with added features like stable draft IDs and confirmation-gated sending.6111 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server that gives AI assistants comprehensive access to Apple Mail accounts, enabling email discovery, reading, flag management, and server-side message retrieval.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceAn MCP server for Apple Mail that enables Claude to read, search, manage, and compose emails via AppleScript.2021 npm1MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides programmatic access to Apple Mail, enabling AI assistants like Claude to read, send, search, and manage emails on macOS.25MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables AI models to read, search, and send emails via IMAP and SMTP protocols. It supports various providers like Gmail and Outlook, allowing for tasks such as retrieving unread messages, searching by sender, and managing mailbox folders.-
TDQS
Scored across 52 tools
Tools have distinct purposes and descriptions explicitly cross-reference alternatives (single vs batch, body vs headers vs raw RFC822, search vs list), greatly reducing misselection. Some near-duplicates—health-check vs doctor vs get-sync-status and the eight single/batch pairs—can still be confused, but the guidance is unusually strong.
Nearly all names follow verb_noun kebab-case (list-mailboxes, create-rule, batch-delete-messages). Exceptions like 'doctor' and 'health-check' break the pattern slightly, but overall predictable.
52 tools is far beyond the 3–15 sweet spot; while the domain is broad, many could be consolidated (e.g., single/batch variants, three diagnostic tools, template CRUD vs save/list/get/delete/use). The surface feels heavy and increases selection cost.
Core lifecycle coverage is strong: mailboxes, messages, attachments, rules, templates, smart mailboxes, diagnostics. Minor gaps remain—no copy-message, empty-trash, or draft update/list—but mostly work-aroundable.