Instantly MCP Server

validate_campaign_accounts

Check account eligibility for campaign creation by verifying status and requirements to resolve campaign setup issues.

Instructions

Validate which accounts are eligible for campaign creation. This tool helps debug campaign creation issues by showing the status of all accounts and which ones meet the requirements for sending campaigns.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "validate_campaign_accounts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`email_list`	No	Optional: Specific email addresses to validate. If not provided, shows all account statuses.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 21, 2025

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the tool's function (validation and debugging) and output scope ('shows the status of all accounts'), but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error handling, which are important for a tool that might involve account data access.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence and efficiently adds context in the second, with no wasted words. Every sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's use and value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (validation with optional filtering), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It explains the purpose and usage context but does not cover behavioral aspects like response format or error conditions, which are needed for full agent understanding.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it does not explain the format or validation rules for email addresses), relying entirely on the schema's documentation.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('validate which accounts are eligible') and resources ('campaign creation'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_accounts' or 'get_account_details' by focusing on eligibility validation rather than general listing or retrieval.

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 usage ('helps debug campaign creation issues'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings, such as 'check_feature_availability' or 'list_accounts', which might overlap in functionality.

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