FavCRM

update_campaign

Idempotent

Update an existing campaign, including audience exclusions. Channel cannot be changed after creation. Pass only fields to change.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Name
`status`	No	New campaign status
`segmentId`	No	Segment ID
`campaignId`	Yes	Campaign ID
`scheduledAt`	No	Scheduled timestamp (ISO 8601)
`recipientIds`	No	Explicit customer account IDs
`channelConfig`	No	For email, use subject + htmlBody + optional plainTextBody. Legacy html is normalized to htmlBody.
`recipientSource`	No	Recipient source: all \| segment \| individual \| csv \| list
`audienceExclusions`	No	Optional exclusions: accountIds contains specific customer account IDs; campaignIds contains previous campaign IDs whose accepted recipients must be omitted. Pass empty arrays to clear exclusions.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Tool result payload — shape varies per tool, see the tool description
`summary`	Yes	One-line human-readable summary of the action
`renderType`	Yes	UI rendering hint for the result

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / audienceExclusions

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional exclusions: accountIds contains specific customer account IDs; campaignIds contains previous campaign IDs whose accepted recipients must be omitted. Pass empty arrays to clear exclusions.",
+  "properties": {
+    "accountIds": {
+      "default": [],
+      "items": {
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "maxItems": 1000,
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "campaignIds": {
+      "default": [],
+      "items": {
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "maxItems": 50,
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / recipientIds / description

Previous value: -"Explicit recipient user IDs"New value: +"Explicit customer account IDs"

changedInput schema / properties / recipientSource / description

Previous value: -"Recipient source: segment | tier | manual"New value: +"Recipient source: all | segment | individual | csv | list"

changedInput schema / properties / status / description

Previous value: -"Status filter"New value: +"New campaign status"

First observedJun 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, destructive, and idempotence hints, so the bar for additional behavioral disclosure is lower. The description adds important behavior beyond the schema: channel configuration is immutable after creation and only supplied fields are updated. This gives an agent meaningful operational context without contradicting annotations.

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 short sentences deliver the essential facts with no filler. The core action is stated first, then the most critical constraints. Every sentence earns its place.

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 9-parameter tool with a nested schema and an output schema, the description is appropriately lean because the schema carries the detailed parameter semantics. It covers the operational essentials: target campaign, update scope, and the immutability constraint. It does not explain every interaction between fields, but that is reasonably delegated to the schema and annotations.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the raw field list by clarifying partial-update behavior: 'Pass only fields to change' tells the agent that omitted parameters are preserved. The channel immutability note also directly affects how channelConfig should be handled.

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 verb and resource: 'Update an existing campaign'. It also mentions audience exclusions, which is a distinctive capability among sibling tools. This clearly differentiates it from create_campaign, delete_campaign, restore_campaign, and validate_campaign.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives practical guidance: 'Pass only fields to change' and 'Channel cannot be changed after creation'. This implies partial-update semantics and warns against a common invalid operation. It does not explicitly name create_campaign as an alternative for new campaigns, but the existing-campaign wording makes the boundary clear.

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

All FavCRM 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.