Brevo MCP Server

get_campaign_analytics

Retrieve detailed analytics for a campaign, including recipient-level data and performance metrics. Filter by date range to analyze specific periods.

Instructions

Get detailed analytics for a specific campaign including recipient-level data

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": {
      "campaignId": "<campaignId>"
    },
    "name": "get_campaign_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`campaignId`	Yes	ID of the campaign
`startDate`	No	Start date for analytics (YYYY-MM-DD)
`endDate`	No	End date for analytics (YYYY-MM-DD)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.0.7Jun 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states the operation and data scope; it does not disclose behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, error behavior, or data freshness. As a read operation, safety is implied but not stated.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, meaning is front-loaded. Could include additional structured info like usage context, but remains concise.

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?

With 3 parameters fully described in schema and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose but lacks return format, pagination, or error handling details. Adequate for a simple tool but not comprehensive.

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% (all parameters have descriptions in schema). Description adds 'recipient-level data' which hints at output granularity but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get detailed analytics for a specific campaign' with 'recipient-level data', providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling analytics tools like get_analytics_summary or get_campaigns_performance.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for detailed per-campaign analytics, but lacks when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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

Deploy Server