AdCopilot

Google Ads: create lead form asset

create_lead_form_asset

Creates a lead form asset that can be linked to campaigns or ad groups.

Creating it changes no ad: it shows only once linked with
link_asset_to_campaign, link_asset_to_ad_group or
link_assets_to_customer.

Lead form assets collect user information directly from the ad.

Args:
    customer_id: The Google Ads customer ID (numbers only, no hyphens).
    business_name: Your business name.
    headline: The lead form headline (max 30 characters).
    description: The lead form description (max 200 characters).
    call_to_action_type: One of: LEARN_MORE, GET_QUOTE, APPLY_NOW, SIGN_UP,
        CONTACT_US, SUBSCRIBE, DOWNLOAD, BOOK_NOW, GET_OFFER, REGISTER, GET_INFO,
        REQUEST_DEMO, JOIN_NOW, GET_STARTED.
    privacy_policy_url: URL to your privacy policy.
    fields: List of form fields to collect. Options: FULL_NAME, EMAIL, PHONE_NUMBER,
        POSTAL_CODE, CITY, REGION, COUNTRY, WORK_EMAIL, COMPANY_NAME, WORK_PHONE,
        JOB_TITLE, FIRST_NAME, LAST_NAME.
    post_submit_headline: Headline shown after form submission. Optional.
    post_submit_description: Description shown after form submission. Optional.

Returns:
    Dictionary with the created asset resource name.

Tools revision: d80f65c0.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "customer_id": "<customer_id>",
      "business_name": "<business_name>",
      "headline": "<headline>",
      "description": "<description>",
      "call_to_action_type": "<call_to_action_type>",
      "privacy_policy_url": "<privacy_policy_url>",
      "fields": "<fields>"
    },
    "name": "create_lead_form_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fields`	Yes
`headline`	Yes
`customer_id`	Yes
`description`	Yes
`business_name`	Yes
`privacy_policy_url`	Yes
`call_to_action_type`	Yes
`post_submit_headline`	No
`post_submit_description`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the write, non-idempotent, non-destructive profile, and the description adds the crucial behavioral fact that creation alone changes no ad and only takes effect after linking. It also explains what a lead form asset does in the ad. It stops short of disclosing permission requirements, rate limits, or duplicate-handling behavior.

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 most important fact — that nothing happens until linking — is front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the Args block carries real constraint data rather than filler. The Google-style Args/Returns scaffolding is somewhat verbose given that parameter names are already in the schema, but each line earns its place.

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 nine-parameter mutation with an output schema, the description covers purpose, lifecycle, all parameter constraints, and required follow-up calls. The return value is briefly noted and the output schema handles the rest, so nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and the schema carries no enum or length constraints, yet the description documents all nine parameters with character limits (30/200), the full allowed call_to_action_type list, the full allowed fields list, and optionality for the post-submit fields. This fully compensates for the empty schema descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Creates a lead form asset") and immediately distinguishes itself from the cluster of sibling asset creators by naming the link tools that give it effect. An agent can tell it apart from create_callout_asset, create_sitelink_asset, etc. without opening any 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?

Explicitly says the asset is inert until linked and names the three alternatives (link_asset_to_campaign, link_asset_to_ad_group, link_assets_to_customer) that follow it, which is the key when-to-use signal. It does not state when to prefer a lead form over other asset types or what prerequisites (permissions, existing campaign) are needed.

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

All AdCopilot 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?