campaignstack

campaignstack_explain_capabilities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Explain how the pieces of this workspace fit together, so you can pick the right tool without opening several to compare them. Call this when you are choosing between similar tools, when a request does not obviously map to one tool, or when an error tells you to consult it. topic: overview (default), watchers (how to choose between the eight ways to monitor something), workflows (how a workflow gets its leads, and which tool creates which kind), platforms (what can be acted on and what is tracking-only), outreach_and_safety (who sends, what the limits are, and what to confirm with the user first). It is a static reference and returns no live counts: each topic names the list tool that does (campaignstack_get_signal_agents, campaignstack_get_workflows, and so on). Costs nothing and reads no workspace data.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`topic`	No	Which map to return. Defaults to overview.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`topic`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "topic": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: it is a static reference, returns no live counts, reads no workspace data, and costs nothing. This fully sets expectations for a safe, side-effect-free tool.

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?

The description is dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, when-to-use, topic breakdown, and behavioral caveat. It front-loads the core purpose and usage guidance before enumerating topics, keeping the structure logical and scannable.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage conditions, topic semantics, behavior, and limitations, and an output schema exists to describe the return value. For a zero-parameter-required, read-only reference tool, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Although the schema already covers the single optional topic parameter with an enum and description, the description greatly enriches each enum value by explaining what each topic covers (e.g., watchers: how to choose between eight monitoring methods; outreach_and_safety: who sends, limits, what to confirm with the user). It also reinforces the default, adding real decision-making value.

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 states a specific purpose: explaining how workspace pieces fit together to help select the right tool. It clearly differentiates itself from the many get_* and edit_* siblings by positioning itself as a static reference that names the appropriate list tool per topic.

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?

It gives explicit trigger conditions: when choosing between similar tools, when a request does not map obviously to one tool, or when an error directs consultation. It also clarifies what it is not for by stating it returns no live counts and that each topic names the actual list tool, guiding the agent to the correct alternative.

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?