Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailchimp MCP Server

Mailchimp MCP Server

by BusyBee3333
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

mailchimp_campaigns_schedule

Schedule a campaign to send at a specific time, with timewarp and batch delivery options for optimized audience reach.

Instructions

Schedule a campaign to be sent at a specific time

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": "mailchimp_campaigns_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timewarpNoEnable Timewarp (send at local recipient time)
campaign_idYesCampaign ID
schedule_timeYesISO 8601 datetime to send (e.g., 2024-12-31T10:00:00Z)
batch_deliveryNoBatch delivery settings

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., campaign status), whether scheduling overwrites existing schedules, or how timezone is handled. The agent is left guessing about side effects.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, concise sentence with no fluff, front-loading the core action. It earns its place as a summary, though it is terse given the tool's complexity.

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?

For a tool with nested objects (batch_delivery) and timezone-related options (timewarp), the description is too sparse. It lacks information about expected return values, prerequisites, and relationships to sibling tools, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the behavior of timewarp or batch_delivery, but the schema already describes them adequately.

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 action (schedule) and resource (campaign) with the key detail 'at a specific time'. This distinguishes it from siblings like mailchimp_campaigns_send (immediate send) and mailchimp_campaigns_unschedule.

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. It does not mention that 'send' sends immediately or that 'unschedule' cancels a scheduled send, leaving the agent without context for selecting this tool.

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