rankparse-mcp

zeekeo_create_campaign

Creates a Zeekeo LinkedIn campaign: sends a connection invite using invite_template_id, and optionally — if followup_template_id is given — waits for the invite to be accepted, then sends a follow-up message using that template. Create templates first with zeekeo_create_template. Provide exactly one of filter_url (a LinkedIn search results URL) or profile_urls (specific profiles) as the target. This starts REAL LinkedIn automation once the campaign has profiles in it — confirm with the user before calling. Requires the user to have connected their own Zeekeo Launchpad account. Direct them to rankparse.com/dashboard/integrations to connect it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Campaign name
`filter_url`	No	A LinkedIn search results URL to source profiles from. Provide this or profile_urls, not both.
`invite_delay`	No	Seconds to wait before the first invite (default 0)
`invite_limit`	No	Max invites to send (default 20)
`profile_urls`	No	Specific LinkedIn profile URLs to target. Provide this or filter_url, not both.
`invite_template_id`	Yes	Template id from zeekeo_create_template (type linkedin_invite)
`followup_delay_hours`	No	Hours to wait after connection before the follow-up (default 24)
`followup_template_id`	No	Template id from zeekeo_create_template (type linkedin_message) for a follow-up message sent after the invite is accepted. Omit for an invite-only campaign. Must be a linkedin_message template — email_message and linkedin_inmail templates are not valid here.
`exclude_past_campaigns_targets`	No	Skip people already targeted in a previous campaign (default true)
`exclude_first_degree_connections`	No	Skip people already connected to the user (default true)

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint false, openWorldHint true), the description warns that this starts REAL LinkedIn automation, explains the conditional follow-up after acceptance, and discloses the prerequisite of a connected user account. No contradiction with 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?

Five sentences, each earning its place: core action and flow, template prerequisite, target selection constraint, real-automation warning, and account-connection dependency. Front-loaded and free of filler.

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?

High-complexity tool (10 params, side-effecting real automation) is well covered with prerequisites, safety warnings, and flow explanation. Minor gaps remain around return values and precise launch timing, but no output schema exists and the description carries the core context effectively.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds valuable cross-parameter semantics: the invite/followup_template_id relationship, the exactly-one-of constraint for filter_url/profile_urls, and template type restrictions. This goes beyond 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?

Description clearly states it creates a Zeekeo LinkedIn campaign with a connection invite and optional follow-up message. The flow description is specific and distinguishes from sibling outreach_create_campaign by naming the Zeekeo resource and tying to zeekeo_create_template.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: create templates first with zeekeo_create_template, supply exactly one of filter_url or profile_urls, confirm with the user before starting real automation, and ensure the user has connected their Zeekeo Launchpad account. This is unusually thorough when-to-use and when-not-to-call guidance.

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

All rankparse-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tool set is largely well-disambiguated with clear prefixes (get_, outreach_, zeekeo_) and detailed descriptions for each tool. Some tools like get_site_explorer and get_site_health could be confused at a glance, but their descriptions clearly separate their purposes. Overall, the naming and descriptions prevent meaningful ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent get_ prefix for data retrieval, with sub-prefixes like get_gsc_, get_page_, and outreach_/zeekeo_ for distinct workflows. There is no mixing of naming conventions (e.g., camelCase) or inconsistent verb usage. The naming pattern is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

With 63 tools, this server vastly exceeds the typical 3-15 tool scope, categorizing as an extreme overflow. Even for a comprehensive SEO and outreach suite, the sheer number is overwhelming and likely includes redundant or overlapping functionality. This would be confusing for agents and users alike.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of SEO, backlink analysis, Google Search Console data, and outreach workflows, appearing nearly complete for its stated purpose. However, several tools are marked as 'v1 stub' (e.g., get_internal_links, get_schema_markup), indicating incomplete functionality. Despite these gaps, the overall coverage is extensive and well-rounded.

Resources

Need Help?