campaignstack

campaignstack_get_craft_config_tree

Read-onlyIdempotent

Everything a craft prompt is built from, in one read: the workspace's five playbook sections with their caps, offerContext, capabilities and outreach intents; every campaign's guidance, offer addendum and intents; every workflow's craft nodes with the text a human wrote into them; every signal agent's script; and one voice profile summary per person and language. It also returns warnings: tone language in an agent script, a section written as an explanation of itself, the same sentence sitting at two levels, a campaign goal promising something the offer never states, a greeting that is really a whole message, a voice built on almost no real writing. Each warning names the tool and field that fixes it. Call this before editing craft configuration, or when the user asks to change how CampaignStack writes messages. It does not show one node's actual rendered prompt: campaignstack_preview_craft_prompt does that for a specific lead. Exemplars and message bodies are never returned.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`include`	No	Subtrees to return. Default: all five.
`campaignId`	No	Narrow campaigns and their workflows to this one campaign.
`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.
`resolveForWorkflowId`	No	Also return what THIS workflow resolves to: which intent level wins, which sections its scope is sent, and the campaign guidance and offer addendum it carries.
`resolveForSignalAgentId`	No	Same, for a signal agent. An agent resolves workflow then workspace and never sees a campaign's guidance or intents.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`voice`	No
`warnings`	No
`campaigns`	No
`workflows`	No
`workspace`	No
`signalAgents`	No
`resolvedForWorkflow`	No
`resolvedForSignalAgent`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field 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."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "campaigns": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "items": {},
+              "type": "array"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "resolvedForSignalAgent": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {}
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "resolvedForWorkflow": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {}
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "signalAgents": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "items": {},
+              "type": "array"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "voice": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "items": {},
+              "type": "array"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "items": {},
+              "type": "array"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "workflows": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "items": {},
+              "type": "array"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "workspace": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {}
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent, read-only operation, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real context beyond them: the six categories of warnings returned and the fact that each warning names the tool/field that fixes it, and the hard exclusion that exemplars and message bodies are never returned. It does not discuss cost or pagination, hence not a 5.

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?

The definition is long but front-loaded: scope first, then warnings, then usage, then exclusions. Every sentence carries distinct information, though the warning enumeration reads as a run-on list that could be tightened.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Combined with the scope statement, the warning inventory, the explicit exclusions, and the routing to the sibling preview tool, an agent has everything required to call this correctly for a 5-parameter optional-all read tool.

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 schema already documents include, campaignId, workspaceId, and both resolveFor options in detail. The description adds no syntax, format, or interaction guidance for these parameters (e.g. how include interacts with resolveForWorkflowId), so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 first sentence states a specific resource (the craft config tree) and enumerates its contents — playbook sections, campaign guidance, workflow craft nodes, signal agent scripts, voice profiles. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling campaignstack_preview_craft_prompt, so an agent can route between the two without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('Call this before editing craft configuration, or when the user asks to change how CampaignStack writes messages') paired with a named alternative for the adjacent need ('It does not show one node's actual rendered prompt: campaignstack_preview_craft_prompt does that for a specific lead').

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?