Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Beehiiv MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List publication field values

publication_fields_values_index
Read-onlyIdempotent

List publication field values for Beehiiv publications, filtered by publication, field, or status. Supports pagination for reading account data.

Instructions

List publication field values. Reads account data. OAuth integrations require publication_fields:read.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo**Offset-based pagination (deprecated)**: Page number for offset-based pagination. Please migrate to cursor-based pagination using the `cursor` parameter. If not specified, results 1-10 from page 1 will be returned.
limitNoA limit on the number of objects to be returned. The limit can range between 1 and 100, and the default is 10.
cursorNo**Cursor-based pagination (recommended)**: Use this opaque cursor token to fetch the next page of results. When provided, pagination will use cursor-based method which is more efficient and consistent than offset-based pagination.
statusNoFilter the fields returned for a publication by whether they have been archived. Only applies alongside `publication_id`, and defaults to `active`.
accountNoNamed private account from BEEHIIV_ACCOUNTS. Defaults to BEEHIIV_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT or the first configured account.
all_pagesNoRead successive cursor pages, bounded by max_items (default 1000).
max_itemsNoMaximum records when all_pages=true. Returns continuation cursor and truncation.
publication_idNoReturn one result per field for this publication. Cannot be combined with `publication_field_id`.
publication_field_idNoReturn one result per publication for this field. Cannot be combined with `publication_id`. Archived fields are accepted, since their values still resolve in content.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the auth requirement ('OAuth integrations require publication_fields:read'), which is genuine context beyond annotations, but 'Reads account data' is vague filler and nothing is said about pagination or result size.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no padding. The middle sentence ('Reads account data') is the weakest and borders on redundant with the readOnlyHint annotation, but the overall size is appropriate.

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?

With 9 parameters, cursor/offset pagination, and a status filter, this is a moderately complex tool, and the description says nothing about the two mutually exclusive lookup modes or pagination behavior. The 100% schema coverage and existing annotations carry most of the burden, so it is adequate but leaves real gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 9 parameters including pagination modes, status filter, and the mutually exclusive publication_id/publication_field_id pair. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a verb and resource ('List publication field values'), which is better than a tautology, but it does not distinguish itself from the very similar sibling 'list_publication_fields'. An agent cannot tell from the description whether this returns field definitions or the distinct values stored in those fields.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives. The only contextual information given is the OAuth scope prerequisite ('publication_fields:read'), which is a prerequisite rather than usage guidance.

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