Metadata MCP Connector

Search Campaigns by Name

search_campaigns_by_names

Read-only

Search for campaigns by name to get campaign details, IDs, and status.

            KEYWORDS: campaign, search, find, lookup, status, active, paused, draft, marketing, advertising

            **USE THIS TOOL WHEN THE USER ASKS ABOUT:**
            - Campaign details, information, or status
            - Finding a campaign by name
            - Getting campaign IDs
            - Checking if a campaign exists
            - Looking up campaign status (active, paused, draft)
            - Any question containing words like: "campaign", "show me", "find", "search", "list", "details", "status"

            **ALWAYS use this tool first** before launching, updating, or referencing any campaign.

            SEARCH FEATURES:
            - Partial, case-insensitive matching (e.g., "Q1" matches "Q1_2026_Campaign")
            - Returns campaign ID, full name, and current status
            - Searches up to 150 visible campaigns per term

            PARAMETERS:
            - campaign_names: Array of campaign name strings to search for (required)

            RETURNS:
            {
                "found_campaigns": [
                    {
                        "id": 159490,
                        "name": "LinkedIn_BoFu_Q1_2026",
                        "statusLabel": "Active"
                    }
                ],
                "missing_names": ["NonExistent"],
                "total_found": 1
            }

            STATUS LABELS: Active, Paused, Draft, Completed, Unknown

            Use returned campaign IDs with launch_campaign or manage_campaign tools.

            Anchor all date-related decisions to the REAL current date — call get_current_date if you are not already certain what today is.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`campaign_names`	Yes	Array of campaign names or partial names to search for (case-insensitive, partial matching)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds matching semantics (partial, case-insensitive), the 150-campaign visibility limit, possible status labels, and a precise return shape including missing_names. This is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with a crisp one-liner and uses clear headings, but it is bloated by a keyword list, a very broad 'any question containing...' trigger, and an unrelated note about anchoring date decisions to get_current_date. Several sentences restate information already in the schema or title.

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 single-parameter, read-only search tool, this is nearly complete: it documents matching behavior, limits, status enums, and the return payload even without an output schema. It does not discuss empty-result edge cases or distinguish itself from search_campaigns_by_utm_value, but these are minor gaps for the stated purpose.

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% and the schema already documents the array semantics, case-insensitivity, and partial matching. The description restates the parameter but adds no new meaning beyond an illustrative return example, so the baseline score applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Search for campaigns by name to get campaign details, IDs, and status.' This clearly separates it from search_campaigns_by_utm_value and supplies the exact output fields. The text also lists concrete use cases rather than restating the tool name.

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 explicit trigger conditions ('Use this tool when the user asks about...') and a strong precedence rule ('ALWAYS use this tool first') before launch/update actions. It lacks a direct 'when not to use' or named alternatives among siblings, but the decision context is clear.

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

All Metadata MCP Connector 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.

Resources

Need Help?