Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ActiveCampaign MCP

ActiveCampaign MCP

by ohneben
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

create_customer

Creates a new e-commerce customer record in ActiveCampaign using connection ID, external ID, and email.

Instructions

🟡 WRITE · creates data · Ecom Customers · POST /ecomCustomers

Create a customer

Creates a new record. Not idempotent — calling twice may create duplicates.

Create a new e-commerce customer resource.

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": "create_customer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoRequest body (application/json).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate non-idempotence and non-read-only, and the description reinforces this. However, it adds no new behavioral context (e.g., side effects, rate limits, required permissions) beyond what annotations provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description contains slight redundancy (e.g., 'Create a customer' and 'Create a new e-commerce customer resource' convey the same info). It is not excessively long, but could be more streamlined.

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?

The description lacks important context such as expected response format, handling of required fields, and the implications of the open world hint. For a create tool with nested parameters and no output schema, more detail is needed.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the schema already documents the properties. The description does not add any parameter-level details or clarify usage beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool as creating a customer and specifies the domain (Ecom Customers) and HTTP method (POST). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like create_a_new_contact or create_an_account, which also create records but for different entities.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., update_customer, list_all_customers). The only usage-related information is the non-idempotence warning, which is more about behavior than context.

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