campaignstack

Edit workspace integrations

campaignstack_edit_workspace_integrations

Destructive

Link an integration the person owns into this workspace, unlink it from this workspace, or disconnect it by deleting this workspace's stored credentials. Disconnect and unlink do not undo provider-side data already sent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`operations`	Yes
`workspaceId`	No	Workspace ID. Omit it when this connection reaches one workspace: a workspace key (cs_) is bound to its own, and a user key (csu_) or connected app whose person belongs to exactly one workspace defaults to that one. Required only when the person belongs to several; the error then lists them, and campaignstack_whoami reports them too.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`failed`	No
`result`	No
`results`	No
`warnings`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 29, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / description

Previous value: -"Workspace ID. REQUIRED for a user key (csu_), which spans every workspace you belong to; omitted for a workspace key (cs_), which is bound to one and ignores this argument. campaignstack_whoami reports which kind of key you are holding and, for a user key, the workspaces it can reach."New value: +"Workspace ID. Omit it when this connection reaches one workspace: a workspace key (cs_) is bound to its own, and a user key (csu_) or connected app whose person belongs to exactly one workspace defaults to that one. Required only when the person belongs to several; the error then lists them, and campaignstack_whoami reports them too."

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "workspaceId",
-  "operations"
-]New value: +[
+  "operations"
+]

AddedSep 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds valuable context beyond them: it clarifies that disconnect deletes the workspace's stored credentials and that neither unlink nor disconnect undoes provider-side data already sent. This exceeds the annotation baseline meaningfully.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two tight sentences: the first enumerates the operations, the second delivers the irreversible-data caveat. No waste, front-loaded action.

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?

For a destructive multi-operation tool with an output schema present, the description covers the operations and the key irreversibility caveat. It could go further on the fromWorkspaceId parameter and confirmDisconnect flag, but the core behavioral risk is disclosed.

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 50%; workspaceId is fully documented in the schema with rich omission logic, while the operations array fields (op, provider) have no descriptions. The description names the three op values but does not explain fromWorkspaceId or confirmDisconnect, leaving some parameters undocumented but doing better than the raw schema.

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 specific verbs (link, unlink, disconnect) and resource (integration into/from workspace) with a clear three-way scope. An agent can distinguish this from campaignstack_configure_integration and campaignstack_edit_workspace_accounts.

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?

The three operations are enumerated but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose link vs unlink vs disconnect, nor any routing to sibling tools like campaignstack_configure_integration. Usage is implied by the operation names rather than stated.

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

All campaignstack 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?