Skip to main content
Glama
vishalsg42

munim

by vishalsg42
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

apply_mail_setup

Apply a prepared email setup plan to a client's account. Requires explicit approval only when replacing an existing record; otherwise, it executes safely and returns the changes made.

Instructions

Carry out a plan from plan_mail_setup.

Returns what was published and what was left unchanged, plus a run_id. When approval is needed and not given it returns needs_approval and changes nothing, so calling it again with approved=true is safe.

approved is required only for records that already exist. Creating one that is absent is not a judgement call; replacing one somebody published is theirs to make, so show them the plan first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clientYesThe client to act on, by the name you registered them under. A write resolves this one client's credentials and no other.
plan_idYesThe plan_id that plan_mail_setup returned. A plan made for a different client is refused.
approvedNoRequired only when the plan would replace a record that already exists. That is the client's decision, so show them the plan before setting this.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / approved / description
      Added value: +"Required only when the plan would replace a record that already exists. That is the client's decision, so show them the plan before setting this."
    • addedInput schema / properties / client / description
      Added value: +"The client to act on, by the name you registered them under. A write resolves this one client's credentials and no other."
    • addedInput schema / properties / plan_id / description
      Added value: +"The plan_id that plan_mail_setup returned. A plan made for a different client is refused."
  2. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does this well. It discloses return values, the needs_approval state, that changes are not made without approval, that retrying with approved=true is safe, and the side-effect distinction between creating absent records and replacing existing ones.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded. The opening sentence states the action immediately, and every subsequent sentence adds necessary context about return values and approval semantics without repetition or filler.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns, what side effects it may have, and how to handle approval. An agent has enough information to decide whether to call it and to interpret the likely result.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that approved is only needed for existing records nominally and that retrying is safe, which clarifies the parameter's behavioral meaning rather than just its type.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Carry out a plan from plan_mail_setup.' It clearly identifies this as the execution counterpart to planning, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like plan_mail_setup, check, and fix.

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?

It gives concrete guidance on when approval is needed, when it is not, and advises showing the plan before setting approved=true. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the context is clear enough for correct use.

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