Sweeppea MCP

fetch_surveys

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a paginated list of surveys, optionally filtered by sweepstakes, enabled state or archived state. An empty filter returns all surveys in the account. Requires the Surveys module enabled — on 403 "module is not enabled", do NOT retry; tell the user to contact Sweeppea support. IsLocked is derived at read time: true when the survey already has responses (its question structure can no longer be replaced). Questions are NOT included here — use get_survey for the full question set. DISPLAY RULE: never show SurveyToken UUIDs; present survey names, counts and the shareable PublicLink instead.

fetch_surveys

When to use

Pre-calls required

fetch_sweepstakes if the user gave you a sweepstakes name instead of a token

Parameters to validate before calling

sweepstakes_token (string, optional) — Filter by a specific sweepstakes (UUID v4, optional)
status (boolean, optional) — true = enabled only, false = disabled only, omit = both (optional)
archived (boolean, optional) — Filter by archived state; omit for both (optional)
page (number, optional) — range: 1–+∞ — Page number (optional, default 1)
limit (number, optional) — range: 1–200 — Results per page (optional, default 50, max 200)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (optional, default 1)
`limit`	No	Results per page (optional, default 50, max 200)
`status`	No	true = enabled only, false = disabled only, omit = both (optional)
`archived`	No	Filter by archived state; omit for both (optional)
`sweepstakes_token`	No	Filter by a specific sweepstakes (UUID v4, optional)

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond this: IsLocked is derived at read time, the Surveys module must be enabled, 403 handling with explicit no-retry instruction, and a display rule forbidding SurveyToken UUIDs. This goes well beyond what annotations convey.

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 bloated and repetitive: the first paragraph is repeated verbatim under the '# fetch_surveys' heading, and the 'Parameters to validate' section duplicates the input schema. While the content is useful, the redundancy means several sentences do not earn their place, and the structure could be much tighter.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it mentions pagination, excludes questions, explains IsLocked derivation, gives error handling instructions, and outlines display rules. It does not detail the return object structure, but the display rule and references to counts and PublicLink give enough for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the parameter details from the schema almost verbatim, adding only a pre-call note for sweepstakes_token. It does not introduce new semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 clearly states 'Fetch a paginated list of surveys' with optional filters, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by noting 'Questions are NOT included here — use get_survey for the full question set.' This makes the purpose precise and differentiates it from other survey-related tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit 'When to use' guidance, including a pre-call requirement for fetch_sweepstakes when a sweepstakes name is given, and a clear error-handling instruction for 403 'module is not enabled' (do NOT retry, contact support). It also specifies when to use get_survey instead, fulfilling both when-to-use and when-not-to-use criteria.

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

All Sweeppea MCP tools Inspect

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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools follow a clear resource+action pattern (fetch_* for lists, get_* for single items, create/update/delete for writes), making them distinguishable. A few near-overlaps exist (fetch_billing_transactions vs fetch_wallet_transactions, draw_winners vs schedule_drawing) but the descriptions clarify the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case verb_noun, with fetch_ for list operations and get_ for single-item retrieval. Some verb variation (add_participant, count_participants, draw_winners, schedule_drawing) deviates from the dominant create/fetch/update/delete pattern but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 83 tools, this is far beyond a well-scoped server (typically 3-15, with 25+ considered too many). Even though the platform has broad functionality, the sheer number of tools creates significant agent confusion and selection overhead.

Completeness4/5

The sweepstakes domain is thoroughly covered: lifecycle management, participants, groups, rules, drawings, winners, calendar, notes, todos, tickets, surveys, invoices, billing, files, and entry settings. A few minor gaps exist (e.g., no general participant field update, no archive action) but the surface is remarkably complete for its scope.

Resources

Need Help?