Skip to main content
Glama

ProductClank

by com.productclank

Create a discovery campaign

create_campaign

Create a Communiply discovery campaign: it continuously finds relevant social posts (by keyword) and drafts replies that mention the product. BEFORE calling: the keywords and search_context are YOURS to derive, and deriving them well is most of the campaign's quality — actually fetch and read the product's website (and any docs or pages the user pointed at), work out who the audience is and the phrases they use when they have the problem the product solves, and build keywords + search_context from that. Do it in this conversation, for free — it is not billed, and you can iterate with the user before anything is spent. If you cannot browse the web from this client, SAY SO to the user and build from what they tell you instead — never silently guess from the product's name alone. Credits pay only for what you cannot do here: scraping the platforms, real community members posting, and proof verification. Costs 10 credits to create; discovering posts is billed separately via generate_posts (12 credits/post). Needs a product_id (search_products / create_product). Two ways to run it, and the user picks: PRIVATE (the default here) keeps drafts in their workbench to review and post themselves — reversible, no further cost; PUBLIC puts the drafts in the ProductClank earn feed so community members post them from their own accounts — that is the reach the platform exists for, and each network-posted reply bills the user extra credits. Default to private when the user has not said, and relay the decision_offer in the result so they can choose. Pick the platform the product's audience actually talks on — X (default), LinkedIn, Reddit or YouTube — and for Reddit/YouTube narrow it with target_subreddits / target_youtube_channels. Topic research auto-runs in the background at create (~30s); read it with get_research before spending on generate_posts. Confirm the credit cost with the user before calling.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesCampaign title, e.g. 'Grow Acme — AI devtools conversations'
keywordsYesSearch keywords/phrases to discover posts with (3–8 focused phrases work best). Derive these from the product's actual site and audience — the words people use when they HAVE the problem ('CI is so slow', 'alternatives to X'), not the product's own marketing vocabulary or its name.
platformNoWhich network to work: twitter (default), linkedin, reddit, youtube. This is WHERE discovery looks — distinct from `sources` in update_campaign, which is HOW it looks there. Pick from where the product's audience actually is; it is fixed once the campaign discovers its first post.
product_idYesProduct UUID (from search_products or create_product)
visibilityNoWho posts the drafted replies. private (default) = they wait in the user's workbench for the user to post; public = the community earn feed distributes them and network members post them, billing the user per posted reply. Reversible either way — ask the user rather than assuming.
reply_lengthNo
search_contextYesOne or two sentences on what conversations to find and why the product is relevant to them. Write it from having actually read the product's site and this conversation — who the audience is, what pain they voice, what makes the product a natural mention. This steers both discovery and the relevance gate, so a generic sentence produces generic (billed) posts.
mention_accountsNoX handles to mention naturally in replies (e.g. the product's account)
reply_guidelinesNoCustom guidelines for reply drafting (defaults are built from the campaign context)
reply_style_tagsNoTone tags for drafted replies, e.g. ['helpful', 'builder-to-builder']
target_subredditsNoReddit only, and enforced server-side: sending this on a non-Reddit campaign is REJECTED with an error, never silently ignored. Subreddits to rotate through, with or without the 'r/' prefix. Omit to search all of Reddit. Note Reddit allows at most one posted reply per subreddit per day, so breadth beats depth here.
target_youtube_channelsNoYouTube only, and enforced server-side: sending this on a non-YouTube campaign is REJECTED with an error, never silently ignored. Channel handles, ids or URLs to pull recent videos from, alongside the keyword search. Omit for keyword search alone.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses far beyond the annotations: it costs 10 credits, topic research auto-runs in the background, public mode posts to the earn feed and bills extra, and private mode is reversible. It also warns not to silently guess keywords when web access is unavailable. None of this contradicts the readOnlyHint=false / destructiveHint=false annotations.

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 description is long but the tool is complex and the length is mostly earned by operational instructions, cost warnings, and decision defaults. It is front-loaded with the core definition and workflow. Some redundancy with the schema exists (e.g., platform options and visibility semantics), but the repetition reinforces high-stakes decisions.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 12-parameter, billed, multi-mode campaign creation tool with no output schema, this description is exceptionally complete. It covers preparation, cost model, mode selection, platform choice, background research, prerequisites, and post-creation next steps. An agent can confidently proceed to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Even though schema coverage is high at 92%, the description adds crucial meaning: keywords must be derived from real audience language, search_context steers discovery and relevance, platform must match where the audience actually talks, and visibility has cost/reach implications. The platform-specific targeting guidance also clarifies behavior not fully captured by the schema alone.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a Communiply discovery campaign' and immediately explains what it does — continuously finds relevant social posts by keyword and drafts replies mentioning the product. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_content_campaign.

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?

There is extensive usage context: prerequisites (product_id via search_products/create_product), cost confirmation, defaulting to private visibility, and the recommendation to read get_research before using generate_posts. However, it does not explicitly state when to use an alternative tool such as create_content_campaign, so it lacks a true when-not/exclusion statement.

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

All ProductClank toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map cleanly to a distinct resource and action: campaigns, posts, products, research, content spaces, and submissions. A few pairs are close—`create_campaign` vs `create_content_campaign` and `check_balance` vs `get_earnings`—but the detailed descriptions make the intended selection clear.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set largely follows a consistent `verb_noun` snake_case pattern (`list_campaigns`, `generate_posts`, `update_campaign`, `submit_participation`). Minor deviations keep it from a perfect score: `credit_history` lacks a verb, and `create_campaign` reads as generic next to the more specific `create_content_campaign`.

Tool Count3/5

30 tools is high and makes the server feel heavy, but the domain genuinely spans products, credits, campaigns, research, post discovery, content spaces, boosts, and participation rewards. The breadth mostly earns the count, though it sits on the wrong side of the typical 3–15 range.

Completeness4/5

The core end-to-end workflow is covered: create and configure campaigns, discover and refine posts, run research, find opportunities, submit work, and measure results. Gaps exist but are minor for the central purpose—product listings can’t be updated or deleted, and delegates can be added but not removed.

Resources