AIGigLab MCP Server

get_leads

Fetch leads collected for a campaign by providing its ID. Pagination is supported via page and limit parameters.

Instructions

Fetch leads collected for a specific campaign.

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": {
      "campaignId": "<campaignId>"
    },
    "name": "get_leads"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No
`limit`	No
`campaignId`	Yes	The ID of the campaign

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Jul 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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. It only states 'Fetch', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits like pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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?

Single sentence with no extraneous words. Could be slightly more informative given the low parameter coverage, but remains appropriately concise.

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?

No output schema and minimal description. Fails to mention pagination, response format, or how leads are returned. For a tool with 3 parameters and pagination defaults, this is insufficient.

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 low (33%, only campaignId described). The description adds no meaning for page and limit parameters, missing an opportunity to clarify their roles (e.g., pagination defaults or range).

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('leads collected for a specific campaign'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like scrape_leads and export_leads by focusing on retrieval for a given campaign.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as scrape_leads or export_leads. The description only implies need for a campaign ID but does not set expectations for filtering or scope.

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