inbox-review
Skill33 starsChanged 8 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Morning inbox workflow -- multi-account scan, thread grouping, priority classification, draft replies
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
Always iterate ALL configured accounts, not just the default:
- Very specific: line 24
Never assume a single account.
- Distinctive: line 28
Use proper IMAP search criteria -- these are NOT free-text queries:
- Distinctive: line 89
Start of day inbox review
- Distinctive: line 91
When inbox has accumulated many unread messages across accounts
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Inbox Review
Systematic morning inbox review with email-specific intelligence.
Multi-Account Handling
Always iterate ALL configured accounts, not just the default:
# List folders for all accounts first
folders(action="list")
# Then search each account
messages(action="search", query="UNSEEN", account="work@company.com")
messages(action="search", query="UNSEEN", account="personal@gmail.com")Never assume a single account. Users with EMAIL_CREDENTIALS containing multiple accounts expect all to be checked.
IMAP Search Syntax
Use proper IMAP search criteria -- these are NOT free-text queries:
| Intent | Correct syntax | Wrong (will fail or return wrong results) |
| Unread emails | UNSEEN | unread, is:unread |
| Since a date | SINCE 2026-03-20 | after:2026-03-20, date>2026-03-20 |
| From a sender | FROM sender@email.com | from:sender, sender@email.com |
| Flagged/starred | FLAGGED | starred, is:starred |
| With subject | SUBJECT "meeting notes" | subject:meeting |
| Combine criteria | UNSEEN SINCE 2026-03-20 | UNSEEN AND SINCE 2026-03-20 (no AND keyword) |
| Unread + from | UNSEEN FROM boss@co.com | UNSEEN AND FROM boss@co.com |
IMAP criteria are space-separated (implicit AND). There is no explicit AND/OR keyword in basic IMAP search.
Thread Grouping
Group messages by conversation, not individual emails:
- Fetch unread messages
- Group by Subject line (strip
Re:,Fwd:prefixes, normalize whitespace) - Within each thread, sort by date ascending
- Display thread with message count: "Meeting Q2 Planning (4 messages, latest from Alice 2h ago)"
This prevents showing 10 individual replies to the same thread as 10 separate items.
Priority Classification
Classify based on recipient role and sender signals:
| Signal | Priority | Reasoning |
You are in To: field | Action Required | Direct request to you |
You are in CC: field | FYI | Informational, no action expected |
| Mailing list headers present | Low | Bulk/automated |
Reply-To differs from From | Low | Likely automated/newsletter |
Known sender + To: you directly | High | Personal direct message |
noreply@, notifications@ | Low | System notification |
Output Format
Present results grouped by priority, not by account:
## Action Required (3)
- [work] "Q2 Budget Approval" from CFO (2h ago) -- needs your sign-off
- [work] "Code Review: PR #142" from Alice (5h ago) -- review requested
- [personal] "Lease Renewal" from landlord (1d ago) -- response needed
## FYI (5)
- [work] "Sprint Retro Notes" from PM (3h ago) -- CC'd, meeting summary
...
## Low Priority (12)
- [work] 8 newsletter/notification emails
- [personal] 4 promotional emailsFor Action Required items, suggest one-line draft replies the user can approve or edit.
When to Use
- Start of day inbox review
- Catching up after time away from email
- When inbox has accumulated many unread messages across accounts
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- n24q02m/email★ 33100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.