Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Conecto

by chat.conecto
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get an outreach campaign

outreach_get_campaign
Read-onlyIdempotent

One campaign: its settings, its numbers (people queued, messaged, replied, interested, not interested, bounced, unsubscribed, stopped; emails sent, the reply rate, what it cost, and each step's emails and the replies after it) and its people page by page, each with their status (queued, messaged, replied, interested, not_interested, bounced, unsubscribed, stopped, unconfirmed or failed), the emails sent to them, when the next one goes and their CRM contact_id. waiting says why a running campaign sends nothing right now, when the account is paused or its balance can't pay. Free.

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": {
      "campaign_id": "<campaign_id>"
    },
    "name": "outreach_get_campaign"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo
statusNoOnly the people in this state.
campaign_idYesThe campaign_id outreach_save_campaign answered with.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish this as a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: it explains pagination ('people page by page'), the meaning of `waiting`, and notes it is 'Free.' No contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single dense, parenthetical-heavy passage that reads more like an exhaustive field dump than a structured tool definition. The core action is front-loaded, but the long inline enumerations harm readability and conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately explains returned data and campaign statistics. However, it omits important parameter behavior such as pagination limits and how the `status` filter works, leaving the tool call semantics incomplete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 50%, and the description does not explain the `limit`, `offset`, or `status` filter parameters. It lists status values as returned fields but does not clarify that `status` filters the people list, leaving half the parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies a single campaign resource and enumerates the settings, statistics, and paginated people it returns. It distinguishes itself implicitly from list-oriented sibling tools like `outreach_campaigns` by saying 'One campaign,' but does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

The description provides almost no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `outreach_campaigns`, `outreach_preview`, or `outreach_replies`. It implies retrieval of a campaign by ID, but offers no conditions, exclusions, or routing advice.

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

All Conecto toolsInspect
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