Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

TextKit

by com.jointextkit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Plan campaign

plan_campaign
Read-onlyIdempotent

Every input a send needs, as questions to ask the person, with this account's options for each. kind automation: the event that starts it (tracked events with their properties, and the Mixpanel events mapped to them), filters, how long after the event to text, right away or optimal user time, the event that ends it, follow-ups, repeats, who gets it, the message, link, sender and topic. kind broadcast: audience, who to leave out, message, when, sender, topic, follow-up. Also who never gets the text (exclusions) and what is missing (gaps). Changes nothing.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "plan_campaign"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoautomation (texts started by an event) or broadcast (one send to an audience).automation

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Changes nothing.' It also adds real value beyond annotations by disclosing the shape of the response (questions plus this account's options) and the extra 'exclusions' and 'gaps' sections that the agent would not know to expect.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the per-kind enumerations are long run-on lists ('filters, how long after the event to text, right away or optimal user time, the event that ends it, follow-ups, repeats...') that would be clearer as a shaped list. It is dense but not padded with filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description must explain what comes back, and it does so field-by-field for both kinds plus the exclusions and gaps sections. The remaining gap is that it never indicates the response format (structured vs. prose) or how gaps should be acted on.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the enum is already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description earns above that by spelling out what each kind returns — automation revolves around the triggering/ending event and timing, broadcast around audience and scheduling — making the enum choice consequential rather than cosmetic.

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 states it returns 'every input a send needs, as questions to ask the person, with this account's options' — an agent can tell this is a planning/questionnaire tool, not a sender. It is weakened only by the lack of a crisp verb and no mention of how it differs from siblings like plan_task, plan_import, or preview_automation.

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?

There is no explicit statement about when to reach for this versus create_automation, preview_automation, or the sibling planning tools. 'Changes nothing' hints it is a safe pre-step, but the agent must infer that this is the planning stage that precedes an actual campaign creation.

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

All TextKit 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