Skip to main content
Glama
damientilman

Mailchimp MCP

get_campaign_content

Read-only

Retrieve the plain text (and optionally HTML) body of a sent campaign for content audits, analysis, or repurposing.

Instructions

Read the rendered body copy of a campaign (plain text, optionally HTML).

Use to retrieve the email copy that was actually sent, for content audits, analysis, or repurposing. Use get_campaign_details for settings/metadata (subject line, sender) and get_campaign_report for post-send performance. Use list_campaigns or search_campaigns to find campaign IDs.

Args: campaign_id: The Mailchimp campaign ID (e.g. 'abc123def4'). Obtain from list_campaigns or search_campaigns. This is the API id, not the numeric web_id from the dashboard URL. include_html: When True, also return the raw HTML body. Defaults to False so responses stay compact; plain_text is enough for most content work.

Returns: JSON with campaign_id and plain_text (the plain-text body); html is added only when include_html=True. For A/B (variate) campaigns, a variations array is included with one entry per content variation: {label, plain_text, and html when include_html=True}. Very long bodies are capped (see MAILCHIMP_MAX_CONTENT_CHARS); when that happens a truncated field names the affected parts. Returns error if the campaign_id is invalid or the campaign has no content.

Example: get_campaign_content(campaign_id="abc123def4") -> {"campaign_id": "abc123def4", "plain_text": "Hi |FNAME| ..."}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNo
campaign_idYes
include_htmlNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds substantial context: return format (JSON with campaign_id and plain_text, optional html), handling of A/B campaigns (variations array), content length caps (truncated field), error conditions (invalid ID or no content), and an example. All behaviors are disclosed transparently.

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 well-structured with a concise first sentence stating purpose, followed by usage guidelines, parameter details, return value description, and an example. Each sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy or excess.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a read-only content retrieval tool, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it returns, how to identify campaigns, handling of A/B variations, truncation behavior, error cases, and an example. With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return structure further. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description explains campaign_id and include_html clearly, including their defaults and usage. However, the optional 'account' parameter (present in schema with anyOf null/string) is not mentioned. Given the schema coverage is 0%, the description should ideally cover all parameters. This omission is a minor gap, but the two main parameters are well explained.

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 starts with a clear verb and resource: 'Read the rendered body copy of a campaign (plain text, optionally HTML).' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_campaign_details and get_campaign_report by specifying what each is used for, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool ('for content audits, analysis, or repurposing'), when to use alternatives (get_campaign_details for settings, get_campaign_report for performance), and how to obtain the required campaign_id via list_campaigns or search_campaigns. This provides clear guidance without ambiguity.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/damientilman/mailchimp-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server