Skip to main content
Glama

Mailchimp

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Mailchimp Get Campaign

mailchimp_get_campaign
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get full details of a campaign by ID (e.g., "abc123def456"). Returns settings, tracking configuration, performance stats, and send history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_apiKeyYesMailchimp API key
campaign_idYesCampaign ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoCampaign ID
typeNoCampaign type
titleNoCampaign title
_linksNoHAL links
statusNoCampaign status
web_idNoWeb ID
list_idNoAssociated audience/list ID
reply_toNoReply-to email
settingsNoCampaign settings
trackingNoTracking configuration
from_nameNoFrom name
send_timeNoSend time ISO date
archive_urlNoArchive URL
create_timeNoISO date when campaign was created
emails_sentNoNumber of emails sent
template_idNoTemplate ID
preview_textNoPreview text
subject_lineNoEmail subject line
report_summaryNoPerformance summary statistics
long_archive_urlNoLong archive URL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "_links": {
+      "description": "HAL links",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "archive_url": {
+      "description": "Archive URL",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "create_time": {
+      "description": "ISO date when campaign was created",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "emails_sent": {
+      "description": "Number of emails sent",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "from_name": {
+      "description": "From name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Campaign ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "list_id": {
+      "description": "Associated audience/list ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "long_archive_url": {
+      "description": "Long archive URL",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "preview_text": {
+      "description": "Preview text",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "reply_to": {
+      "description": "Reply-to email",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "report_summary": {
+      "description": "Performance summary statistics",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "send_time": {
+      "description": "Send time ISO date",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "settings": {
+      "description": "Campaign settings",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Campaign status",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "subject_line": {
+      "description": "Email subject line",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "template_id": {
+      "description": "Template ID",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "description": "Campaign title",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tracking": {
+      "description": "Tracking configuration",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "description": "Campaign type",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "web_id": {
+      "description": "Web ID",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-mailchimp-api-key",
+    "campaign_id": "abc123def456"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds value by stating what data is returned (settings, tracking, performance stats, send history). No contradiction, but does not elaborate on required permissions or rate limits.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, listing return categories. No wasted words.

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?

Output schema exists (indicated true) so description is not required to explain return values. It lists high-level return categories, adequate for a retrieval tool. No missing context.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description provides an example ID format 'abc123def456' matching the campaign_id parameter, but adds no additional semantic or formatting guidance beyond the 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 the verb 'Get', the resource 'campaign', and the method 'by ID'. It lists the categories of returned data (settings, tracking, performance stats, send history), distinguishing it from sibling tools like mailchimp_list_campaigns which lists campaigns.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implicitly suggests use when details of a specific campaign are needed, but no explicit when-not or alternatives are mentioned. Sibling names indicate there is a list tool, but the description does not guide the agent to choose between list and get.

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

All Mailchimp toolsInspect
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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are near-duplicates: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are currently identical, and discover_tools overlaps heavily with suggest_questions. The six Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, etc.) have fuzzy boundaries that will mislead an agent choosing among them.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most names are snake_case, but patterns vary: verb_noun (list_subscriptions, validate_claim), adjective_noun (recent_alerts, recent_changes), bare verbs (remember, recall, forget), and domain-prefixed tools (ask_pipeworx, polymarket_*, mailchimp_*). No camelCase mixing, but the inconsistency across styles makes prediction of names harder.

Tool Count1/5

The server is named Mailchimp but only 5 of 36 tools are Mailchimp-related; the remaining 31 tools cover unrelated domains (Pipeworx data lookup, prediction markets, memory, subscriptions). This extreme mismatch means the count is wildly inappropriate for the apparent purpose.

Completeness1/5

For a Mailchimp server, the surface is severely incomplete: only read operations exist (list/get audiences, campaigns, members) with no create, update, delete, send, or automation tools. The Pipeworx tools are comparatively rich but their presence does not fix the fact that the Mailchimp domain itself is a dead end.

Resources