Adsap

Create Google Ads Performance Max Campaign

adsap_google_create_pmax_campaign

Create a complete Google Ads Performance Max campaign in ONE atomic request: budget, campaign (ALWAYS created PAUSED — activate later with adsap_google_set_entity_status), location/language targeting, and one asset group with text assets plus images previously created via adsap_google_upload_asset. Use dry_run: true first — Google validates the whole chain without creating anything; show the plan, get confirmation, then execute. Asset-group minimums (enforced): 3-15 headlines (<=30 chars), 1-5 long headlines (<=90), 2-5 descriptions (<=90, at least one <=60), business name (<=25), 1-5 logo images (1:1, min 128x128), 1-20 landscape images (1.91:1, min 600x314), 1-20 square images (1:1, min 300x300). Video is optional — without one, Google may auto-generate video from your assets. bidding_strategy 'auto' resolves to maximize_conversions with a conversion-tracking preflight warning when the account has no conversion actions. retail: true attaches the account's ACTIVE Merchant Center link (fails cleanly if none). ad_account_id is the bare 10-digit customer ID. For Search campaigns use adsap_google_create_search_campaign; for Meta use adsap_create_campaign.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`geo`	Yes
`retail`	No	true = retail PMax: reads the account's ACTIVE Merchant Center link and attaches shopping_setting.merchant_id (fails with a clear error if no active link).
`dry_run`	No
`signals`	No
`campaign`	Yes
`asset_group`	Yes
`language_ids`	No	Language constant ids (default ['1000'] = English).
`ad_account_id`	Yes	Bare 10-digit Google Ads customer ID (from adsap_google_list_ad_accounts). No dashes, no act_ prefix.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: atomic creation, ALWAYS paused, dry-run semantics, enforced asset minimums, optional video auto-generation, auto bidding resolution with a preflight warning, retail Merchant Center behavior, and ad_account_id format. It discloses far more than a generic create statement.

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 dense but every clause earns its place: core behavior and safety workflow first, then enforced constraints, then sibling disambiguation. It is front-loaded and avoids filler.

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?

For a complex nested tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is exceptionally complete: it covers prerequisites, validation flow, creation-time behavior, constraints, failure modes, and alternatives. An agent has what it needs to call the tool correctly and safely.

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 description coverage is only 38%, but the description compensates for the most decision-critical parameters: dry_run, bidding_strategy auto resolution, retail merchant link attachment, ad_account_id format, and image dimension eligibility. It does not narrate every nested field, but the schema itself documents those with detailed descriptions, so the combination is strong.

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 states a specific action ('Create a complete Google Ads Performance Max campaign in ONE atomic request') and enumerates the bundled components: budget, campaign, targeting, and one asset group. It also routes away from siblings by explicitly naming adsap_google_create_search_campaign for Search and adsap_create_campaign for Meta.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives a concrete workflow: run with dry_run: true first, show the validation plan, get confirmation, then execute. It also names prerequisites (images via adsap_google_upload_asset), the post-create activation step via adsap_google_set_entity_status, and the correct sibling tools for Search and Meta campaigns.

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

All Adsap tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?