List the user's saved creatives. NOTE: image_hash works with add_ad_to_adset, but bulk_create_campaigns needs a public imageUrl (or Drive/Dropbox link). Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, and the description reiterates 'Read-only' without adding new behavioral details beyond the image_hash/imageUrl note. More context (e.g., pagination, rate limits) would improve transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise (two sentences), front-loaded with the purpose, and includes a relevant note. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simple input schema and no output schema, the description adequately states the purpose and adds a useful note about the output format. However, it lacks details on pagination, ordering, or authentication, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has one parameter ('limit') with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain it. The meaning of 'limit' may be inferred, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states 'List the user's saved creatives' with a specific verb and resource. The note about image_hash vs imageUrl provides context that differentiates this tool from siblings like add_ad_to_adset and bulk_create_campaigns.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage context by mentioning how the output (image_hash vs imageUrl) relates to other tools, but it does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool, or provide clear alternatives. The guidance is indirect.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but creation tools (create_campaign, bulk_create_campaigns, create_structured, add_ad_to_adset) overlap in scope, potentially causing misselection. However, descriptions clarify differences.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, such as 'bulk_create_campaigns', 'get_insights', 'pause_campaigns'. No mixing of conventions.
23 tools cover the Meta Ads domain well, but the count is slightly high. Most tools are justified, though some could be merged (e.g., creation variants).
Core CRUD is covered for campaigns and ads, but there is no tool to create an ad set independently (only via create_structured). Creative editing and standalone ad set creation are missing, leaving notable gaps.