EmailOctopus MCP Server and API by Cotlet

Get campaign report in EmailOctopus

emailoctopus_get_campaign_report

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get campaign report in the user's own EmailOctopus account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in EmailOctopus step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's EmailOctopus Cloud Browser. EmailOctopus's official API: EmailOctopus has a public REST API (v2) for lists, contacts, fields, tags, campaign reports and starting an automation for a contact, but no official MCP server and no API for creating, scheduling or sending a campaign (checked 20 Oct 2026).

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": "emailoctopus_get_campaign_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuinely new context: it performs no action and opens nothing, and it returns screen/button/field level instructions. The parenthetical about API v2 coverage and the missing MCP server clarifies why a browser-based path is needed, though it is stale-dated and verbose.

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 core behavior is front-loaded, but the text is padded with marketing phrasing ('from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent') and a long, dated API-coverage parenthesis that does not help an agent decide or invoke. It could be half the length without losing signal.

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

Completeness3/5

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; it says step-by-step screens, buttons and fields, which is adequate but leaves the return shape (single guide vs. multiple steps, formatting) vague. For a zero-parameter guide tool this is close to sufficient but not fully specified.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema coverage is complete, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The description correctly implies no input is required beyond the ambient account context.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (get campaign report in EmailOctopus) and clarifies it returns step-by-step UI instructions rather than the report data itself, which distinguishes it from data-bearing siblings like emailoctopus_list_campaigns. The tension between the tool name ('get_report') and the stated behavior ('returns how to do it') costs a point.

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?

It does route the agent forward, saying to perform the action with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Cloud Browser, and notes it opens nothing itself. But it never states when to choose this over siblings such as emailoctopus_list_campaigns, nor when this guide is unnecessary.

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

All EmailOctopus MCP Server and API by Cotlet 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?