Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailchimp MCP Server

Mailchimp MCP Server

by AlexlaGuardia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

schedule_campaign

Schedule a Mailchimp campaign by providing its ID and a future time in ISO 8601 UTC format. The tool sets the campaign to send at the specified moment, enabling automated email dispatch planning.

Instructions

Schedule a campaign. schedule_time must be ISO 8601 UTC (e.g. '2026-04-01T14:00:00+00:00').

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "campaign_id": "<campaign_id>",
      "schedule_time": "<schedule_time>"
    },
    "name": "schedule_campaign"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
campaign_idYes
schedule_timeYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose critical behaviors like whether scheduling overwrites an existing schedule, idempotency, or required campaign state. The only behavioral hint is the ISO 8601 format requirement.

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?

The description is two concise sentences with no extraneous information. The purpose is front-loaded, and the format constraint is efficiently provided.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite low complexity and an output schema, the description lacks details on return values, side effects, and differentiation from sibling tools. It does not explain what happens on success or failure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description partially compensates for 0% schema coverage by explaining the schedule_time format with an example. However, campaign_id is completely undocumented, leaving its semantics to inference.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Schedule' and resource 'a campaign', making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes from siblings like unschedule_campaign and cancel_campaign.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_campaign (which may also schedule) or unschedule_campaign. The description does not mention prerequisites or sequencing.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools