Skip to main content
Glama

create_campaign

Create a new campaign to manage long-running, multi-step AI agent workflows. Define goal, priority, and optional success metrics to track progress.

Instructions

Create a new campaign for long-running, multi-step work.

Args: goal: What this campaign should accomplish. name: Short name for display. Auto-generated if omitted. channel: Discord channel for notifications. priority: urgent / high / normal / low / background. max_depth: Max nesting depth for subtasks (default 4). token_budget: Optional token limit. NULL = unlimited. dry_run: If true, create in paused status for review. success_metric: Short metric name emitted by the verifier / benchmark (e.g. "accuracy_at_1k"). Paired with benchmark_command. Leave NULL for free-form campaigns. benchmark_command: Shell / Python invocation that produces a JSON line with the metric value. Metadata only — the runner does not execute it; worker steps do. scope: Freeform identifier narrowing the benchmark (e.g. "chapter-01", "test_subset_A"). max_iterations: Hard cap on autoresearch-style loops. NULL means open-ended (planner decides).

Returns: Campaign ID, name, status, next_action_at.

Next: Use get_campaign(id) to check progress, or steer_campaign(id, guidance) to adjust.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalYes
nameNo
channelNo
priorityNonormal
max_depthNo
token_budgetNo
dry_runNo
success_metricNo
benchmark_commandNo
scopeNo
max_iterationsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description explains key behaviors: dry_run creates in paused status, benchmark_command is metadata-only, and defaults for several parameters. It does not mention limitations like rate limits or auth needs, but covers main traits.

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 well-organized: a summary line, bulleted Args with concise explanations, a Returns line, and a Next line. Every sentence adds value with zero redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given 11 parameters, 1 required, and an output schema, the description covers all aspects: parameter defaults, behaviors, return values, and next steps. It is comprehensive for a creation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains each of the 11 parameters, including defaults, nullability, and semantics (e.g., 'benchmark_command: Metadata only — the runner does not execute it'). This far exceeds minimal value.

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 'Create a new campaign for long-running, multi-step work,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like steer_campaign by noting follow-up actions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 follow-up guidance ('Next: Use get_campaign... or steer_campaign...'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like abort_branch or spawn_and_continue. It is clear but lacks exclusionary language.

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/retospect/sortie-mcp'

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