Tulina

lemlist_sequence

Read and edit the steps of a campaign sequence, and its A/B tests.

A campaign owns a sequence (seq_…, returned by create) whose steps (stp_…) are the emails, LinkedIn actions and conditions it runs.

Args by op:

get: campaign_id. Every sequence of the campaign with its steps — conditional steps branch into further sequences, so a campaign can hold several.
add_step: sequence_id + step. step.type is required, one of email, manual, phone, api, linkedinVisit, linkedinInvite, linkedinSend, linkedinVoiceNote, linkedinFollow, linkedinLikeLastPost, linkedinCommentLastPost, linkedinEndorse, linkedinWithdrawInvitation, sendToAnotherCampaign, conditional, whatsappMessage, sms. Common fields: index (insert position, appended when omitted), delay (days), subject + message (email), title (manual), method + url (api), conditionKey + delayType (conditional), campaignId (sendToAnotherCampaign).
update_step: sequence_id + step_id + step. step.type is required and must MATCH the existing step — it identifies the shape, it does not convert it. images/videos REPLACE what is there.
delete_step: sequence_id + step_id. Refused by lemlist while the campaign is running — pause it first.
ab_create: sequence_id + step_id (an EMAIL step). Creates variant B prefilled from A and STARTS the split. Email Pro plan.
ab_get / ab_update (step = the B fields: subject, message, altMessage, cc, plainText).
ab_delete: optional variant (default B). A promotes B to A.
ab_winner: variant (A or B) — the winner's template is then sent to every remaining lead.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "op": "<op>"
    },
    "name": "lemlist_sequence"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`op`	Yes
`_org`	No	Org (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
`step`	No
`_group`	No	Équipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
`_run_id`	No	OBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
`step_id`	No
`variant`	No
`_project`	No	Projet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
`_instance`	No	Instance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.
`campaign_id`	No
`sequence_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses that `update_step` will not convert a step type, that `images`/`videos` are replaced rather than merged, that `delete_step` is refused while a campaign runs, that `ab_create` immediately starts the split and requires Email Pro, and that `ab_winner` pushes the winning template to all remaining leads. Gaps remain around error shapes and whether edits are reversible.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The one-line purpose statement is front-loaded, then a scannable per-op bullet list keyed to the `op` enum. It is long but dense — nearly every line conveys a constraint an agent could not infer. Minor cost: the nested line-wrapping inside the description string makes it slightly harder to skim.

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 nine-op mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this covers operation selection, required arguments per op, and side effects. The `get` return shape is sketched (all sequences with their steps, branching conditionals) but return values for the mutation ops are never described.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 45% and `step` is a free-form object with no documented shape, so the description does the heavy lifting: it enumerates every valid `step.type`, maps type-specific fields (`subject`/`message`, `method`/`url`, `conditionKey`/`delayType`, `campaignId`), and explains `index` defaulting to append. It also defines the `variant` semantics for the A/B ops.

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?

Opens with a specific verb pair and resource: read and edit the steps of a campaign sequence plus its A/B tests. It explicitly relates sequences (`seq_…`) to campaigns and steps (`stp_…`), which cleanly separates it from siblings like lemlist_campaign or lemlist_get_campaign that operate on the campaign object itself.

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?

The 'Args by op' breakdown effectively tells the agent which operation to pick and what each requires (e.g. `get` takes `campaign_id`, `add_step` takes `sequence_id` + `step`). It also flags preconditions such as pausing a running campaign before `delete_step`. What it lacks is routing guidance to other tools, e.g. where campaign creation lives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Tulina tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?