Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailchimp MCP Server

Mailchimp MCP Server

by BusyBee3333
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

mailchimp_webhooks_create

Set up a webhook for a Mailchimp list to automatically receive POST requests when subscribers subscribe, unsubscribe, or update their info.

Instructions

Create a new webhook for a list. Webhooks fire when subscribers are added, removed, or their info changes.

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": {
      "list_id": "<list_id>",
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "mailchimp_webhooks_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesWebhook URL to receive POST requests
eventsNoEvents that will trigger the webhook
list_idYesList/audience ID
sourcesNoSources that can trigger the webhook

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds useful behavioral context about when webhooks fire, but does not disclose other traits like whether creation is idempotent, permission requirements, or what the response contains.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Create a new webhook for a list'), no filler. Each sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple create operation with complete schema coverage, the description is adequate. It explains purpose and trigger semantics. No output schema exists, but the tool's behavior is straightforward enough that this isn't a major gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level meaning to the events parameter by mentioning subscriber add/remove/info changes, but does not add detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Create a new webhook for a list' with a specific verb and resource, and elaborates on what webhooks do (fire on subscriber add/remove/info changes). This distinguishes it from sibling operations like webhooks_update and webhooks_delete.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: when you want to set up a webhook to listen for subscriber events. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the create operation is unambiguous given sibling names.

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