Skip to main content
Glama
D4umak

HeyLead

by D4umak
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

campaign_status

Read-only

Monitor a campaign's live progress, review its step-by-step launch plan, or read its status history. Check campaign health without changing anything.

Instructions

Watch a campaign run, show its plan, or read its status history. Changes nothing.

Args:
    action: "monitor" (live progress; a draft is started with
        campaign(action='launch')), "plan" (what happens after launch,
        step by step: finding, warm-up, invitations, opening message,
        follow-ups, replies, leads) or "status_history".
    campaign_id: Which campaign. Uses the active one if empty.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNomonitor
campaign_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.10.389

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds 'Changes nothing' and explains that monitoring a draft requires launching via campaign(action='launch'), adding context beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose ('Watch a campaign run...'), then efficiently lists args with inline explanations. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description explains each action's output concept (live progress, step-by-step plan, history). It also links monitoring to the launch action, which is helpful. Minor gap: no mention of error conditions or return format, but not critical for a monitoring tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries full responsibility. It explains each action value ('monitor', 'plan', 'status_history') with detailed meanings, and clarifies that campaign_id defaults to the active campaign. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 tool watches a campaign run, shows its plan, or reads status history, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from read-only operations but doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like show_status or scheduler_status, though the action options add specificity.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It explains each action (monitor, plan, status_history) but doesn't mention sibling tools or exclusions. An agent would have to infer context from the actions alone.

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