Skip to main content
Glama
ohneben

ActiveCampaign MCP

retrieve_a_contacts_score_value

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the score value for a specific contact in ActiveCampaign to understand engagement or lead quality. Use the contact ID to fetch score data without making changes.

Instructions

🟢 READ-ONLY · Contacts · GET /contacts/{id}/scoreValues

Retrieve a contact's score value

Fetches data. Makes no changes to your ActiveCampaign account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesid of the Contact
limitNoNumber of results per page (ActiveCampaign default 20, max 100).
offsetNoZero-based offset into the result set for pagination.
ordersNoSort order as an object, e.g. {"email":"ASC"} → orders[email]=ASC.
filtersNoField filters as an object, e.g. {"name":"ecom"} → filters[name]=ecom.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds the HTTP method 'GET' and endpoint path, plus 'Fetches data. Makes no changes.' This is consistent and adds some value 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise with only two lines, including an emoji header and endpoint. Every part is useful and front-loaded, no redundancy.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain the return value or structure. For a simple read tool, it's adequate but could be more complete.

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 all parameters described. The description does not add new parameter information, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states 'Retrieve a contact's score value' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'retrieve_a_score' by specifying it's for a particular contact.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'retrieve_a_score' or 'list_all_scores'. The description lacks context on when this tool is appropriate.

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/ohneben/ActiveCampaign-MCP'

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