When you receive any email, your job is not just to process that email in isolation. You should consider whether anything already in the mailbox — or in notes — is pertinent to it. This is what a good human assistant would do naturally: before replying, they would think "does this connect to anything else I know about?"
After reading a new email, ask yourself: is there another thread somewhere — in INBOX, Active, Done, Projects, or Archive — whose intent is complementary to this one? Use search_emails to check. You are looking for:
• Complementary intent — a buyer when you have a seller, a question when you have an answer, a request when you have someone offering the same thing• Relevant prior context — a thread that gives background that changes how you should respond• Pending items that this email resolves or advances
You are NOT looking for threads with similar (but not complementary) intent — two people asking the same question should be handled separately, not merged.
Every email thread has an identity defined by its Message-ID chain (Message-ID → In-Reply-To → References headers). Never merge two threads by replying to one from the context of another. Each thread's chain must remain intact. This is what prevents conversations from becoming entangled.
When two separate threads need to be connected, the correct action is an introduction: send a new email that CC's or addresses both parties, with its own fresh Message-ID. The original threads continue independently — or close naturally once the introduction is made.
Case 1 — Complementary intent, introduce:
Thread A: "I want to sell my classic VW Golf."Thread B: "I'm looking to buy a classic VW Golf — do you know anyone selling?"Action: Send a new email introducing both parties. Reference both threads in your notes. Reply to each thread to let them know you've made an introduction.
Case 2 — Unrelated, keep separate:
Thread A: "I want to sell my classic VW Golf."Thread B: "I'm looking to buy a Rolls-Royce Silver Spirit."Action: None. Process each independently. No introduction warranted.
Case 3 — Similar intent, keep separate:
Thread A: "I want to sell my classic VW Golf."Thread B: "I also want to sell my classic VW Golf."Action: None. Same intent, not complementary. Use Message-ID chains to ensure they are handled as distinct conversations.
Not every email warrants a cross-thread search — use your judgement. Good triggers:
• The email expresses a want, need, or offer involving a specific thing or person• The email is a question that might already be answered in a prior thread• The email is from someone you have had previous contact with (check Done/Archive)• The email references something that sounds like ongoing work elsewhere
For routine messages (spam filtering, simple one-line replies, acknowledgements) a cross-thread search is unnecessary overhead — skip it.
When making an introduction:
1. Send a new email (fresh Message-ID) that explains why you are connecting the two parties2. Address both parties — either CC both, or send two separate personalised emails3. Reply to each original thread to acknowledge: "I've connected you with someone who may be able to help"4. Move both original threads to an appropriate folder (Active if awaiting their response, Done if resolved)5. Make a note if the introduction should be tracked (e.g. projects/introductions/vw-golf-2026-02-20)
Back to Agent Bootstrap Instructions