Get subscriber
mailerlite_get_subscriberFetch a single subscriber by id or email address. MailerLite API: GET /subscribers/{id}.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Subscriber id OR email address. |
mailerlite_get_subscriberFetch a single subscriber by id or email address. MailerLite API: GET /subscribers/{id}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Subscriber id OR email address. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds little behavioral context. It does not mention error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the subscriber is not found. With annotations covering safety, the description's contribution is minimal.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise, using one sentence plus the API endpoint. It is front-loaded with the purpose, with no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
While the description is adequate for a simple fetch, it lacks explanation of the return value (no output schema) and does not mention error conditions. More detail on response structure or edge cases would improve completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and the parameter description already explains that 'id' can be a subscriber id or email. The description echoes this, adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'a single subscriber', and specifies the lookup method by id or email. It also mentions the underlying API endpoint, distinguishing it from siblings like list_subscribers or upsert_subscriber.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies use when fetching a single subscriber by identifier, but lacks explicit guidance on when vs alternatives (e.g., when not to use, or mentioning sibling tools like list_subscribers for bulk retrieval).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a specific resource and action (e.g., subscriber, group, campaign) with no ambiguity. Even similar tools like list_subscribers and list_group_subscribers are clearly differentiated because one is global and the other is scoped to a group.
All tools follow the consistent pattern 'mailerlite_verb_noun' (e.g., list_subscribers, create_group, get_campaign). The prefix ensures uniqueness, and verbs like list, get, create, upsert, assign are used uniformly.
13 tools is reasonable for a MailerLite integration. It covers the core subscriber and group management well, while being lighter on other areas like campaigns and automations. The count is appropriate without being overwhelming.
The tool set covers subscriber and group management (CRUD for subscribers, create/list/assign groups) but is read-only for campaigns, automations, fields, segments, and webhooks. Missing operations like delete subscriber, delete/update group, and any write on campaigns indicate notable gaps.