Kayzen Analytics API와 상호 작용하기 위한 모델 컨텍스트 프로토콜(MCP) 서버 구현입니다. 이 패키지를 사용하면 AI 모델이 표준화된 인터페이스를 통해 Kayzen 광고 캠페인 데이터에 액세스하고 분석할 수 있습니다.
자동 인증 : 자동 새로 고침 메커니즘을 갖춘 내장 토큰 관리
보고서 관리 : Kayzen 분석 보고서에 쉽게 접근
오류 처리 : API 상호 작용을 위한 포괄적인 오류 처리
TypeScript 지원 : 유형 정의를 포함한 전체 TypeScript 구현
환경 기반 구성 : 환경 변수를 사용한 간단한 설정
Related MCP server: Amazon Ads API MCP SDK
지엑스피1
Kayzen 자격 증명으로 .env 파일을 만듭니다.
KAYZEN_USERNAME=your_username
KAYZEN_PASSWORD=your_password
KAYZEN_BASIC_AUTH=your_basic_auth_token
KAYZEN_BASE_URL=https://api.kayzen.io/v1 # Optional, defaults to this valueimport { KayzenMCPServer } from '@feedmob-ai/kayzen-mcp';
const server = new KayzenMCPServer();
server.start();list_reportsKayzen Analytics에서 사용 가능한 모든 보고서를 나열합니다.
입력 : 없음
반환 : 다음을 포함하는 보고서 개체 배열:
id : 보고서 식별자
name : 보고서 이름
type : 보고서 유형
const reports = await server.tools.list_reports();get_report_results특정 보고서에 대한 결과를 검색합니다.
입력 :
report_id (문자열, 필수): 가져올 보고서의 ID
start_date (문자열, 선택 사항): YYYY-MM-DD 형식의 시작 날짜
end_date (문자열, 선택 사항): YYYY-MM-DD 형식의 종료 날짜
반환 : 보고서 데이터 및 메타데이터
const results = await server.tools.get_report_results({
report_id: 'report_id',
start_date: '2024-01-01', // optional
end_date: '2024-01-31' // optional
});analyze_report_results (프롬프트)보고서 결과를 분석하고 통찰력을 제공합니다.
입력 :
report_id (문자열): 분석할 보고서의 ID
분석에는 다음이 포함됩니다 .
성과 지표
주요 동향
최적화 영역
비정상적인 패턴이나 이상 현상
Claude Desktop과 함께 사용하려면 claude_desktop_config.json 에 다음을 추가하세요.
{
"mcpServers": {
"github": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@feedmob-ai/kayzen-mcp"
],
"env": {
"KAYZEN_USERNAME": "username",
"KAYZEN_PASSWORD": "pasword",
"KAYZEN_BASIC_AUTH": "auth token"
}
}
}
}Node.js(v16 이상)
npm(v7 이상)
Kayzen API 자격 증명
# Install dependencies
npm install
# Build the project
npm run build
# Start the server
npm start
# Development mode with hot-reload
npm run devkayzen-mcp/
├── src/
│ ├── server.ts # MCP server implementation
│ └── kayzen-client.ts # Kayzen API client
├── dist/ # Compiled JavaScript
└── package.json # Project configuration주요 종속성:
@modelcontextprotocol/sdk : ^1.7.0
axios : ^1.8.3
dotenv : ^16.4.7
zod : ^3.24.2
서버는 다양한 오류 시나리오를 처리합니다.
인증 실패
잘못된 API 요청
네트워크 문제
토큰 만료 및 새로 고침
잘못된 매개변수
MIT 라이센스
피드몹
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| end_date | No | End date in YYYY-MM-DD format | |
| report_id | Yes | ID of the report to fetch results for | |
| start_date | No | Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0get_report_resultslist_reportsScored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: 'get_report_results' appears to retrieve specific report data, while 'list_reports' enumerates available reports. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to choose the correct tool based on whether it needs to list reports or fetch results from a particular report.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern ('get_report_results' and 'list_reports'), using snake_case throughout. The verbs 'get' and 'list' are standard and predictable, making the tool names easy to understand and use without confusion.
With only two tools, the server feels under-scoped for an analytics domain, which typically involves operations like creating, updating, filtering, or deleting reports. This minimal set may force agents to work around gaps, such as being unable to generate new reports or modify existing ones, limiting functionality.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for analytics: it allows listing and retrieving reports but lacks essential operations like creating, updating, deleting, or filtering reports. This creates significant gaps that will likely cause agent failures when trying to perform common analytics tasks beyond basic read-only access.
Access Google & Meta Ads data via AI. Analyse campaign performance in seconds.
Conversational access to advertising performance data, creative analysis, and campaign insights
Conversational access to advertising performance data, creative analysis, and campaign insights
Marketing intelligence API for AI agents. Real campaign data, not LLM guesses.
