Skip to main content
Glama

Activecampaign

by io.github.pipeworx-io

List Contacts

list_contacts
Read-onlyIdempotent

List/search contacts (subscribers) in an ActiveCampaign account. Filter by exact email or a free-text search across name/email. Returns contacts with IDs, emails, names, and meta.total.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoFilter to an exact email address.
limitNoMax results (default 20, max 100).
searchNoFree-text search across name and email.
_apiKeyYesActiveCampaign API key (UI: Settings → Developer).
accountYesYour ActiveCampaign account URL or subdomain, e.g. "https://youraccount.api-us1.com" or just "youraccount".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-activecampaign-api-key",
+    "account": "myaccount",
+    "email": "john.doe@example.com"
+  },
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-activecampaign-api-key",
+    "account": "myaccount",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "search": "john"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations fully declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds return structure (IDs, emails, names, meta.total). No contradiction; could mention pagination behavior but not required.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, efficient and no fluff.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers purpose, filters, return shape, and safety (via annotations). Missing explicit mention of pagination, but limit param in schema provides that. Sufficient for correct use.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds context by explaining the relationship between email and search filters, and what the return includes, complementing the schema.

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 explicitly states the action ('List/search') and resource ('contacts/subscribers'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'get_contact' by mentioning filtering options and return fields (IDs, emails, names, meta.total).

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 clearly states when to use email for exact match and search for free-text, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like get_contact for single contact by ID, nor mention pagination or ordering.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Activecampaign toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools occupy nearly the same role: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are described as behaviorally identical, ask_pipeworx_grounded and deep_research both route questions across the same large catalog, and the Polymarket tools overlap heavily in intent. The ActiveCampaign list/get tools are distinct, but an agent facing 37 tools would frequently struggle to choose the right research or betting tool.

Naming Consistency2/5

Some clusters are internally consistent (list_*, ask_pipeworx_*, polymarket_*), but the server overall mixes bare verbs like remember and forget, noun phrases like entity_profile and deep_research, and brand-prefixed names like pipeworx_trending and polymarket_arbitrage. There is no unified naming convention across the tool set.

Tool Count2/5

37 tools is excessive for an ActiveCampaign integration, and only 6 of them actually relate to ActiveCampaign. The rest are a broad Pipeworx data, research, and prediction-market utility suite, so the count is not well-scoped to the server's stated purpose.

Completeness1/5

As an ActiveCampaign server, the surface is severely incomplete: it only provides read-only list/get operations and no create, update, delete, send, tag, or workflow-management tools. The unrelated Pipeworx tools may be feature-rich, but they do not fill the gaps in the named ActiveCampaign domain.

Resources