GenFlick

Link or unlink an exact saved platform study and the current experiment revision

native.genads_link_experiment

DestructiveIdempotent

Link or unlink an exact saved platform study and the current experiment revision. Each study ad must map to a staged GenAds release, and the cells must match the plan's control and treatments. Freezes the plan, configuration and release associations; does not start ads, establish randomization or declare a winner. Unlink retains history. Native project editing and advertiser reporting permission are required.

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_link_experiment"
  }
}

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

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: the operation freezes the plan, configuration and release associations, and unlinking retains history. It also discloses the permission requirements (native project editing and advertiser reporting). It does not describe revision-mismatch behavior or the response shape.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then constraints, then scope exclusions, then permissions. Nearly every sentence earns its place; the release-mapping sentence is dense but relevant.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a destructive, idempotent mutation with an output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, preconditions, freeze semantics, undo behavior, and permissions. Remaining gaps (how to obtain a bindingId, behavior on stale expectedRevision) are modest given the schema and output schema.

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 coverage is 50% with 6 parameters. The description ties 'current experiment revision' to expectedRevision and implicitly distinguishes the link path (studyId) from the unlink path (bindingId) via 'Unlink retains history,' but it never explains where bindingId comes from or what request_key, work_id, and read_skills are for. Adequate but not compensating for the coverage gap.

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 pair (link/unlink) plus the exact resources involved: a saved platform study and the current experiment revision. This is clearly distinguishable from adjacent tools such as native.genads_save_experiment, native.genads_read_studies, or native.genads_read_experiment_evidence 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?

Gives real preconditions for use: each study ad must map to a staged GenAds release and the cells must match the plan's control and treatments, plus the required permissions. It also bounds scope with 'does not start ads, establish randomization or declare a winner.' It stops short of naming an alternative tool for the cases it excludes.

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?