ADM Google Ads

List ad assets (sitelinks, callouts, promotions, images and more)

get_assets

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists sitelink, callout, structured_snippet, price, image, promotion, call, business_name and business_logo assets by level (customer = applies to all campaigns, campaign, ad_group) with their content (link_text, descriptions, final_url, callout_text, header + values, price offerings; promotion: promotion_target, percent_off or money_amount_off + currency, occasion, discount_modifier, promotion_code or orders_over_amount, language_code, start_date, end_date; call: country_code, phone_number, call_conversion_reporting_state; business_name; for images and business logos: name, width, height, file_size, image_url, approval_status, review_status) and link_status (ENABLED or PAUSED; removed links are excluded). level, types, asset_ids and link_status are filters: only matching rows are returned. With campaign_id and no level, returns that campaign's and its ad groups' assets plus customer-level assets. Paginated via cursor. Asset text is third-party data.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`level`	No	customer, campaign or ad_group. Omit to return every level.
`limit`	No	Page size, 1-200. Default 50.
`types`	No	sitelink, callout, structured_snippet, price, image, promotion, call, business_name, business_logo. Omit to return every type.
`cursor`	No	Opaque next_cursor from the previous page. Keep the other arguments identical.
`asset_ids`	No	Only these asset ids.
`campaign_id`	No	Optional campaign id (from get_campaigns) to limit results to one campaign.
`customer_id`	Yes	Google Ads customer ID from get_accounts, e.g. 123-456-7890.
`link_status`	No	ENABLED or PAUSED.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: removed links are excluded, results are paginated via cursor, campaign_id without level returns campaign, ad group and customer-level assets, and asset text is third-party data. It does not cover auth requirements or rate limits.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids repetition. Its exhaustive parenthetical listing of returned content fields is information-dense but somewhat unwieldy, so it is not as cleanly structured as it could be.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately describes returned asset content, link_status behavior, pagination, and campaign_id scoping. Annotations cover the read-only safety profile, and the schema documents all eight parameters, so the definition is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the interaction between campaign_id and level and by clarifying that level, types, asset_ids and link_status are filters, not just parameter names.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ("Lists ... assets") and enumerates the exact asset types covered, making it immediately distinguishable from sibling get_ads and other get_* tools. It also states the scoping dimension (level) and returned data, so an agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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?

It explains that level, types, asset_ids and link_status act as filters and clarifies the important campaign_id-without-level behavior, giving clear contextual guidance for invocation. However, it does not name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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

All ADM Google Ads 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?