Skip to main content
Glama
dazanza
by dazanza

list_members

Retrieve subscribers from a Mailchimp audience to sync contacts or audit membership status with filtering and pagination options.

Instructions

List members/subscribers in a Mailchimp audience. Use for syncing or auditing contacts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
list_idYesAudience/list ID
countNoNumber of results (default 100, max 1000)
offsetNoOffset for pagination (default 0)
statusNoFilter by status: subscribed, unsubscribed, cleaned, pending, transactional

Implementation Reference

  • The tool "list_members" is defined using server.tool, and its handler function performs the Mailchimp API call to list members, processes the response to extract relevant contact details, and returns them as a structured MCP response.
    server.tool(
      "list_members",
      "List members/subscribers in a Mailchimp audience. Use for syncing or auditing contacts.",
      {
        list_id: z.string().describe("Audience/list ID"),
        count: z.number().optional().describe("Number of results (default 100, max 1000)"),
        offset: z.number().optional().describe("Offset for pagination (default 0)"),
        status: z.string().optional().describe("Filter by status: subscribed, unsubscribed, cleaned, pending, transactional"),
      },
      async ({ list_id, count, offset, status }) => {
        const opts = { count: count || 100, offset: offset || 0 };
        if (status) opts.status = status;
        const response = await mailchimp.lists.getListMembersInfo(list_id, opts);
        const members = response.members.map((m) => ({
          email: m.email_address,
          first_name: m.merge_fields.FNAME || "",
          last_name: m.merge_fields.LNAME || "",
          status: m.status,
          tags: m.tags.map((t) => t.name),
        }));
        return {
          content: [
            {
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 implies a read-only operation ('List') and hints at use cases, but doesn't detail permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond schema hints, or what the output looks like. It adds some context but lacks comprehensive behavioral traits needed for a tool with no annotation support.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences with zero waste. It front-loads the core purpose and follows with usage context, making it easy to parse quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is somewhat incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters. It covers purpose and usage but lacks details on behavioral aspects like error handling, output format, or advanced filtering. It's minimally viable but has clear gaps in contextual information.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain 'list_id' further or provide examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('members/subscribers in a Mailchimp audience'), making the purpose specific and understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_audiences' by focusing on members within an audience, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other member-related tools like 'add_or_update_member' or 'batch_add_members'.

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 when to use this tool ('for syncing or auditing contacts'), which helps differentiate it from write operations. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., vs. 'list_audiences' for audience metadata) or name specific alternatives among siblings, leaving some ambiguity in tool selection.

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/dazanza/mailchimp-mcp'

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