Skip to main content
Glama

update_campaign

Modify existing email campaign settings in Mailchimp by updating specific fields like subject line, sender name, or preview text.

Instructions

Update campaign settings. Only provide fields you want to change.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
campaign_idYes
subject_lineNo
from_nameNo
reply_toNo
titleNo
preview_textNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The update_campaign tool is defined using @mcp.tool() and handles patching campaign settings via the Mailchimp API.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def update_campaign(
        campaign_id: str,
        subject_line: str = "",
        from_name: str = "",
        reply_to: str = "",
        title: str = "",
        preview_text: str = "",
    ) -> str:
        """Update campaign settings. Only provide fields you want to change."""
        mc = get_client()
        settings: dict[str, str] = {}
        if subject_line:
            settings["subject_line"] = subject_line
        if from_name:
            settings["from_name"] = from_name
        if reply_to:
            settings["reply_to"] = reply_to
        if title:
            settings["title"] = title
        if preview_text:
            settings["preview_text"] = preview_text
        if not settings:
            return "No fields provided to update."
        c = await mc.patch(f"/campaigns/{campaign_id}", json={"settings": settings})
        return _fmt({
            "id": c["id"],
            "status": c.get("status", ""),
            "updated_fields": list(settings.keys()),
            "message": "Campaign updated.",
        })
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that only changed fields need to be provided, which is useful, but fails to address critical aspects like whether this requires specific permissions, if updates are reversible, what happens to unspecified fields, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that are front-loaded and waste no words. Every sentence earns its place by stating the purpose and a key usage note efficiently.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, mutation operation) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral traits or parameter details, though the presence of an output schema mitigates the need to explain return values. This results in a baseline adequacy with clear gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It only vaguely references 'fields you want to change' without explaining what fields are available (e.g., subject_line, from_name) or their purposes. This adds minimal value beyond the schema's property names.

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 states the verb ('update') and resource ('campaign settings'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from similar siblings like 'replicate_campaign' or 'schedule_campaign' beyond the basic update action, which prevents a perfect score.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides some usage guidance with 'Only provide fields you want to change,' which implies partial updates are supported. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_campaign' or 'replicate_campaign,' nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AlexlaGuardia/mcp-mailchimp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server