FeedSquad

Create Campaign

create_campaign

Creates a campaign from the supplied posts, or a scaffold of placeholder drafts when posts are omitted. It writes no copy. Placeholder drafts cannot be approved until their content is replaced, and no campaign post is scheduled until it is approved.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_campaign"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Campaign name
`posts`	No	Optional array of explicit posts (otherwise creates placeholders requiring replacement)
`theme`	No	Content theme or topic
`platform`	No	Target platform	linkedin
`pillar_id`	No
`description`	No	Campaign description
`postsPerWeek`	No	Number of posts per week (default: 3)
`durationWeeks`	No	Campaign duration in weeks (default: 4)
`company_page_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`posts`	Yes
`quota`	No
`theme`	No
`status`	Yes
`progress`	No
`campaign_id`	Yes
`description`	No
`dashboard_url`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds genuine context beyond that: no copy is generated, placeholders cannot be approved until replaced, and nothing is scheduled until approved. This downstream lifecycle consequence is exactly the kind of behavioral detail annotations cannot convey; only minor gaps (permissions, draft-state of the new campaign) remain.

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?

Two tight sentences that front-load the core action and then layer the two important consequences. 'It writes no copy' is a short, high-value clarification, though the sentence about placeholders and scheduling could be merged for slightly tighter flow.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the required name parameter is documented. The description covers the main ambiguity (posts omitted vs. supplied) and the approval workflow, leaving only secondary details like permission requirements or how theme/pillar_id affect generated placeholders.

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

Parameters3/5

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

At 78% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description largely restates the schema's own explanation of the posts parameter (omitted means placeholders). It adds no meaning for theme, platform, pillar_id, postsPerWeek, durationWeeks, or company_page_id beyond what the schema already documents.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Creates a campaign') and immediately clarifies the two creation modes: explicit posts vs. a scaffold of placeholder drafts. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like create_post or create_posts, so it falls short of a 5, but the campaign-level scope is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Use is implied by describing what happens when posts are supplied versus omitted, which tells an agent the two supported call patterns. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to create_post/create_posts, and no stated prerequisites or conditions under which one mode should be preferred.

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

All FeedSquad 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?