Brevo MCP Server

get_contact_analytics

Retrieve contact engagement metrics like opens and clicks. Filter by email, list, or date range to analyze specific contact interactions.

Instructions

Get analytics for contacts including engagement metrics

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_contact_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	No	Filter by specific email address
`listId`	No	Filter by list ID
`startDate`	No	Start date for engagement data
`endDate`	No	End date for engagement data

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.0.7Jun 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose key behaviors. It only states the tool 'gets analytics' but does not confirm it's read-only, mention rate limits, response size, or performance implications. Essential transparency is lacking.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is not verbose, but could be expanded slightly to improve completeness without sacrificing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide richer context about return values, aggregation, and usage patterns. It falls short, lacking details on what engagement metrics are included or how filtering works.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions on all four parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. It does not elaborate on how parameters like startDate/endDate affect engagement metrics.

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 tool retrieves analytics for contacts, highlighting 'engagement metrics'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_campaign_analytics by specifying 'contacts' as the resource, though it could further differentiate from get_analytics_summary.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs siblings such as get_analytics_summary. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or scenarios where other tools are more appropriate.

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

Deploy Server