Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailchimp MCP

Mailchimp MCP

by damientilman
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

get_survey_report

Read-only

Retrieve a detailed performance report for a specific survey to review response rates and engagement.

Instructions

Get the report for a single survey.

Retrieves the detailed performance report for one survey identified by its id. Use this to review response rates and engagement for a specific survey.

Args: survey_id: The unique id of the survey to report on.

Returns: JSON with the survey report.

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": {
      "survey_id": "<survey_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_survey_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNo
survey_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.7.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it retrieves a report with response rates and engagement, which is consistent and minimally expands beyond annotations.

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?

Description is concise with a clear heading, a short paragraph, and structured Args/Returns sections. Slight redundancy between first two lines, but overall efficient.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the output schema exists, the description adequately covers what the tool does and when to use it. It mentions the report content (response rates, engagement) and identifies the required parameter. Missing account parameter explanation is a minor gap.

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 has 0% coverage. Description explains survey_id as 'the unique id of the survey to report on', which adds meaning for that required parameter. However, the optional 'account' parameter is not mentioned, leaving a gap.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Get', resource 'report for a single survey', and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_survey or list_survey_reports by specifying 'single survey' and 'detailed performance report'.

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?

States 'Use this to review response rates and engagement for a specific survey', providing clear context. Lacks explicit exclusions or direct comparisons to alternatives, but the purpose is well delineated.

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