Skip to main content
Glama
YosefHayim

ebay-mcp

by YosefHayim
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ebay_clone_campaign

Clone an existing eBay marketing campaign using its campaign ID and a request body with new campaign name, dates, and funding strategy. Create a duplicate to reuse successful settings.

Instructions

Clone campaign through the eBay Marketing API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYesClone campaign request body
campaignIdYescampaignId required endpoint parameter

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.14.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / campaignId / description
      Previous value: -"Campaign ID"New value: +"campaignId required endpoint parameter"
    • removedInput schema / properties / cloneData
      Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "description": "New campaign settings",
-  "properties": {
-    "campaignName": {
-      "description": "Name for the cloned campaign",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "endDate": {
-      "description": "End date (ISO 8601 format)",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "fundingStrategy": {
-      "additionalProperties": false,
-      "properties": {
-        "bidPercentage": {
-          "description": "Bid percentage (e.g., \"10.5\")",
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "fundingModel": {
-          "enum": [
-            "COST_PER_SALE",
-            "COST_PER_CLICK"
-          ],
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "startDate": {
-      "description": "Start date (ISO 8601 format)",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / request
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Clone campaign request body",
+  "properties": {
+    "campaignName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "endDate": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "fundingStrategy": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "bidPercentage": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "fundingModel": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "startDate": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "campaignName"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "campaignId",
-  "cloneData"
-]New value: +[
+  "campaignId",
+  "request"
+]
  2. First observedv1.8.10

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations only communicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not explain that cloning likely creates a new campaign, what gets copied, whether the clone is immediately active, or what the outcome is. The phrase 'through the eBay Marketing API' adds no behavioral transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately short, though it sacrifices useful context for brevity.

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?

Given the nested request object, sparse annotations, and no output schema, the one-line description is incomplete. It does not explain the cloning semantics, what the response contains, or any constraints on campaignId and request fields, leaving an agent to rely on schema names and assumptions.

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 even though the description itself adds no parameter semantics. The schema descriptions are tautological ('campaignId required endpoint parameter', 'Clone campaign request body') and do not clarify what values should be provided, but the high coverage prevents a lower score.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Clone campaign through the eBay Marketing API.' This is a clear operation and is distinct in intent from nearby campaign tools like create_campaign or update_campaign_identification. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from other campaign-related siblings.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The only usage signal is inferred from the verb 'clone,' which is not enough for an agent to distinguish it from similarly named or related campaign mutation tools.

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