Mark

Get Content Performance

get_content_performance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reports how published content performed over a period (reach, engagement, clicks by channel, post, pillar and angle), with period-over-period change. kpis is the Targets page (/settings/targets): every KPI target with its month (YYYY-MM), target, actual and progressPercent, computed the same way the page does. The actual counts posts published in the target's month, their latest checkpoint, and leads created in it, in the workspace time zone; it ignores from, to, pillarId and marketId. period is past, current (actual so far) or not_started (actual null). When there is no number, actual is { note } with the reason, such as a metric Mark doesn't track yet. engagement_rate values are percents (4.5 means 4.5%). Does not change anything. Related: save_strategy_item (kind kpi_target), delete_strategy_item, get_search_performance, get_calendar, search_posts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Range end YYYY-MM-DD.
`from`	No	Range start YYYY-MM-DD. Defaults to the last 28 settled days.
`marketId`	No	Filter to one market.
`pillarId`	No	Filter to one pillar.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kpis`	Yes
`appUrl`	Yes
`performance`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 8, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / kpis / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedOutput schema / properties / kpis / properties

Added value: +{
+  "appUrl": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "currentMonth": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "targets": {
+    "items": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "actual": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "anyOf": [
+                {
+                  "additionalProperties": false,
+                  "properties": {
+                    "value": {
+                      "type": "number"
+                    }
+                  },
+                  "required": [
+                    "value"
+                  ],
+                  "type": "object"
+                },
+                {
+                  "additionalProperties": false,
+                  "properties": {
+                    "note": {
+                      "type": "string"
+                    }
+                  },
+                  "required": [
+                    "note"
+                  ],
+                  "type": "object"
+                }
+              ]
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "null"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        "id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "label": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "metric": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "month": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "period": {
+          "enum": [
+            "past",
+            "current",
+            "not_started"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "progressPercent": {
+          "type": [
+            "number",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "target": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "actual",
+        "id",
+        "label",
+        "metric",
+        "month",
+        "period",
+        "progressPercent",
+        "target"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / kpis / required

Added value: +[
+  "appUrl",
+  "currentMonth",
+  "targets"
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / kpis / type
```
Added value: +"object"
```

First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile, yet the description adds substantive behavior: the kpis block ignores four of the input filters, actual is null vs { note } with a reason, period takes past/current/not_started, and engagement_rate values are percents. These are non-obvious traits an agent could not derive from annotations or schema.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence and keeps every subsequent sentence information-bearing. The middle paragraph is a dense wall of text covering kpis semantics, which is justified by complexity but harder to scan than the rest.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value detail is not required, and annotations already carry the safety profile. Given the tool's complexity, the description still covers filter behavior, null handling, and value scales, leaving nothing essential for correct invocation unaddressed.

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%, so the schema already documents the four parameters (baseline 3). The description goes beyond it by explaining that from/to/pillarId/marketId are ignored in the kpis computation and by defining the semantics of a 'period' concept and the percent scale, though it leaves the exact interaction between the two modes somewhat implicit.

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?

States a specific verb ('Reports') and resource ('published content performed over a period') and enumerates the metric families returned (reach, engagement, clicks by channel, post, pillar, angle). It also names a sibling it relates to (save_strategy_item, get_search_performance), so an agent can distinguish it from other getters without opening the schema.

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?

The 'Related:' line and the explanation that the kpis block mirrors the Targets page give clear context for when this tool applies, and the 'ignores from, to, pillarId and marketId' note warns the agent about a surprising interaction. However, it never states explicit exclusions (e.g. when to prefer get_search_performance or get_calendar instead), so routing is contextual rather than prescriptive.

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

All Mark 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?