Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailchimp MCP Server

Mailchimp MCP Server

by AlexlaGuardia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

start_automation

Activate a Mailchimp classic automation workflow by providing its ID, triggering all emails in the predefined sequence.

Instructions

Start all emails in a classic automation workflow.

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": {
      "workflow_id": "<workflow_id>"
    },
    "name": "start_automation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workflow_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It indicates the tool starts emails but does not clarify side effects, reversibility, authentication needs, or the state of the workflow (e.g., whether it restarts a paused workflow).

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but too minimal. While it earns its place by stating purpose, it lacks front-loaded details about parameters or usage, and could be restructured to provide more value without excessive length.

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?

Given that the tool has one required parameter, no annotations, and a sibling set that includes many related actions, the description fails to provide sufficient context. It does not explain the output schema, the effect of the operation, or how workflow_id relates to other tools like list_automations.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention the workflow_id parameter at all. The agent receives no guidance on what this parameter represents or how to obtain it, making parameter usage opaque.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool as starting all emails in a classic automation workflow, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like pause_automation, but the term 'classic' may be jargon and not universally understood.

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 pause_automation or list_automations. There is no explicit context for usage, prerequisites, or common scenarios.

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