Retrieve a single campaign by numeric ID and view its full statistics, including totals for sent, delivered, failed, opened, clicked, and unsubscribed.
Retrieve one campaign with its statistics: total, sent, delivered, failed, opened, clicked and unsubscribed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Numeric campaign id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description's 'Retrieve' is consistent with those. The description adds the return statistics list but no further behavioral detail such as not-found handling or rate limits; with annotations present this is adequate but not rich.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource and then lists the returned statistics. No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter read tool, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns by naming each statistic. There is no output schema, so the listed stats partly fill that gap; the only minor omission is explicit statement of behavior when the id does not exist.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already fully documents the sole parameter ('Numeric campaign id', exclusiveMinimum 0), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond implying the id selects one campaign, meeting the baseline.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and a concrete resource ('one campaign') and enumerates the statistics returned. This clearly distinguishes it from list_campaigns (plural listing) and other get_* siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description makes it clear this is the tool for fetching a single campaign along with its stats, so an agent can infer when to choose it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but for a simple read tool the context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.