Skip to main content
Glama

ai-content-drop

by com.aicontentdrop
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ad to board

ad_to_canvas_card

Place a saved competitor ad on a board as a media card (its video or image, the advertiser as title, the hook as caption) with its decoded brief attached when it has one. Costs no credits. Returns the whole board and the new card. SIGN-IN REQUIRED: connect this server with OAuth (the host prompts for it), or add an API key header "Authorization: Bearer acd_live_…" created at https://aicontentdrop.com/settings/integrations.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ad_idYesA saved ad's id, from list_saved_ads or save_competitor_ad.
revisionNoThe board revision this change is based on. Optional: when omitted the tool reads the current one first.
canvas_idYesThe board id, from list_canvases or create_canvas.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
adYes
cardYes
canvasYes
next_stepYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / canvas / properties / updated_at
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": [
-    "string",
-    "null"
-  ]
-}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / canvas / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "name",
-  "revision",
-  "card_count",
-  "updated_at",
-  "link",
-  "cards",
-  "edges"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "name",
+  "revision",
+  "card_count",
+  "link",
+  "cards",
+  "edges"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description adds important behavior: it costs no credits, requires OAuth or an API key, and returns the whole board plus the new card. It does not explain revision conflict behavior or failure modes, which are relevant for a non-idempotent mutation.

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 purpose and result are front-loaded, followed by cost and authentication details. Every sentence provides operational value, including the necessary sign-in instructions, with no wasted prose.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description is still complete enough for invocation: it identifies required inputs indirectly, explains the card transformation, states credit cost, and covers authentication. No critical calling context is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents ad_id, canvas_id, and revision fully. The description adds context about the ad-to-card mapping but does not add meaning beyond the schema for individual parameters.

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: placing a saved competitor ad on a board as a media card. It also specifies the field mapping (ad video/image as media, advertiser as title, hook as caption), which clearly distinguishes it from generic card-creation siblings like add_media_card.

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 context is clear: use this when a saved competitor ad should become a board card, and it implicitly requires an existing ad_id and board. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, such as when to use add_media_card instead.

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

All ai-content-drop toolsInspect
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