Skip to main content
Glama

campaignstack

by io.campaignstack
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

campaignstack_restore_superseded_draft

Put back the draft a retry replaced. Retrying re-crafts the message and can produce a worse one than it replaced, so the previous draft is kept: this restores it and clears the stash. The pending review cards report it as supersededDraft, with the critic score of each side and retryScoredWorse when the replacement scored lower. Call this when the user reads both versions and prefers the one campaignstack_retry_review discarded. Returns restored: false when nothing was stashed, which is the normal answer for a draft that was never retried.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entryIdYes
workspaceIdYesWorkspace 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.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entryIdNo
restoredNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "entryId": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "restored": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "not": {}
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "boolean"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / description
      Added 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."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only indicate readOnly=false, openWorld=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it restores the previous draft, clears the stash, surfaces supersededDraft and retryScoredWorse in review cards, and returns restored:false when no stash exists. This is exactly the kind of non-obvious state behavior an agent needs.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then adds the rationale, the exact trigger condition, and the return edge case. Each sentence contributes a distinct fact; there is no filler or repetition of schema/annotation information.

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?

The description is rich: it covers the action, rationale, when to call, related review-card terms, and the restored:false case. The only meaningful gap is the missing description of entryId, which prevents the agent from confidently knowing which identifier to pass.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%: workspaceId has a thorough schema description, but entryId has only 'type: string'. The tool description never states what entryId identifies or how to obtain it, despite the tool being centered on a specific entry's draft. It does not compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 verb and resource: 'Put back the draft a retry replaced.' It clearly differentiates from the counterpart campaignstack_retry_review by describing the restore action and the stash-clearing behavior, so an agent can tell exactly which tool this is.

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?

The description gives an explicit trigger condition: 'Call this when the user reads both versions and prefers the one campaignstack_retry_review discarded.' It names the sibling alternative and even explains the normal no-op case ('nothing was stashed... never retried'), which helps an agent decide when the tool is unnecessary.

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

All campaignstack toolsInspect
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