GenFlick

Read the durable status of a saved advertising request

native.genads_ad_operation

DestructiveIdempotent

Read the durable status of a saved advertising request.

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": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.genads_ad_operation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`work_id`	Yes
`arguments`	Yes
`read_skills`	Yes	Exact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
`request_key`	Yes
`publication_proposal_id`	No	For native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
`expected_catalog_version`	Yes	For a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description frames the tool as a read ('Read the durable status'), yet the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true with openWorldHint=true. That is a direct conflict: an agent told this is a read could invoke a destructive, open-world operation. The description also omits the required request_key/work_id scoping and any visibility or retention semantics the 'durable' wording implies.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler, which is structurally clean. However, the efficiency is achieved by omission rather than by precision — the single sentence is simply the title repeated, so brevity here reflects under-specification.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but that is the only burden lifted. For a tool with five required parameters, nested objects, an open-world destructive profile, and dozens of closely named genads siblings, the description provides nothing an agent could use to call it correctly or safely.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Six parameters with only 50% schema description coverage, and the description adds no meaning for any of them. The three undocumented ones (work_id, arguments.operation_id, request_key) are unexplained in both the schema and the description, so the agent cannot tell what scopes a request or how the operation_id relates to the reported status.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The sentence names a verb ('Read') and a resource ('the durable status of a saved advertising request'), so the intent is graspable. But it is an exact restatement of the title and never explains what a 'saved advertising request' is or how this differs from nearby siblings such as native.genads_ad_action, native.get_work, or native.get_run_status.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance at all: nothing says when to call this instead of native.get_work, native.wait_for_work, or native.genads_stop_ad_request, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name and parameter shapes.

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

All GenFlick 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?