Skip to main content
Glama

send16-mcp

by io.github.spruikco
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Duplicate campaign

duplicate_campaign

Duplicate a campaign (template, content, and settings) as a new draft; works on sent campaigns too, so this is the way to re-use a past campaign's design. Optionally rename and retarget in the same call (exactly ONE of audienceIds / segmentId / contactIds / tagIds / sendToAll). NOTE: without retargeting, the copy keeps the ORIGINAL campaign's recipients.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoName for the new draft (default: original name + ' (Copy)')
apiKeyNoSend16 API key (overrides SEND16_API_KEY env var)
tagIdsNoRetarget the new draft to contacts with these tag IDs
segmentIdNoRetarget the new draft to this segment
sendToAllNoRetarget the new draft to all subscribed contacts
campaignIdYesCampaign ID to duplicate
contactIdsNoRetarget the new draft to these contact IDs
audienceIdsNoRetarget the new draft to these audience IDs (see list_audiences)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / audienceIds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retarget the new draft to these audience IDs (see list_audiences)",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / campaignId / description
      Previous value: -"Campaign ID"New value: +"Campaign ID to duplicate"
    • addedInput schema / properties / contactIds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retarget the new draft to these contact IDs",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / name
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Name for the new draft (default: original name + ' (Copy)')",
+  "maxLength": 100,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / segmentId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retarget the new draft to this segment",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / sendToAll
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retarget the new draft to all subscribed contacts",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tagIds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retarget the new draft to contacts with these tag IDs",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes beyond the annotations (which only mark it as a non-idempotent write, destructive=false) by disclosing that it works on already-sent campaigns and, critically, that without retargeting the copy keeps the ORIGINAL recipients — a non-obvious behavioral trap that the schema and annotations do not reveal.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and the re-use rationale, followed by the constraint and the recipient warning. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 an 8-param, no-output-schema tool, it covers purpose, the retargeting exclusivity rule, and the key recipient caveat. It stops short of stating what the call returns (e.g., the new draft's ID), which an agent might want given no output schema exists.

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 parameter basics are already documented, but the description adds real meaning the schema lacks: the 'exactly ONE of audienceIds / segmentId / contactIds / tagIds / sendToAll' mutual-exclusivity rule, which would be invisible otherwise. The rename via name is only implied.

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?

States a specific verb (duplicate) and resource (campaign) plus what gets copied (template, content, settings) and the output (a new draft). This clearly distinguishes it from create_campaign and update_campaign without opening any schema.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use it ('the way to re-use a past campaign's design') and states the retargeting constraint explicitly. It does not name a specific alternative tool (e.g., create_campaign) for the from-scratch case, so it falls just short of full routing guidance.

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

All send16-mcp 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