Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
undo

undo

by tathagat22
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

List held emails

walkback_email_pending

View staged emails that are pending release and can still be cancelled.

Instructions

Show emails staged but not yet released — these can still be cancelled.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "walkback_email_pending"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdNoProject directory. Defaults to the server's working directory.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that emails are staged (not yet released) and can still be cancelled, which is useful behavioral information beyond the title. However, it lacks details on authorization, side effects, or output format.

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 wasted words. Every part earns its place, clearly communicating the tool's purpose and a key behavioral trait.

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?

For a simple listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains what is shown and a key property (cancellability). Could mention output type (e.g., list of identifiers) but not necessary given simplicity.

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?

The only parameter, cwd, is well-described in the input schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is 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?

Description clearly states verb 'show' and resource 'emails staged but not yet released', distinguishing from sibling tools like cancel, release, and stage. It tells exactly what the tool does.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the sibling names hint at context (cancel, release), the description does not provide usage direction.

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