Skip to main content
Glama

freedom-mcp

by com.getfreedomos

create_meta_ad_draft

Create a complete Meta (Facebook/Instagram) ad draft — campaign + ad set + creative + ad — ALL in PAUSED state, spending nothing. Use when the user wants to set up or draft an ad. Activation is a separate human-approved step (set_meta_ad_status).

[sensitive-tier — first use may require a manager's approval; a from-now-on approval makes future calls seamless, a just-once approval re-asks next time.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ctaNoOptional call-to-action: LEARN_MORE, SIGN_UP, GET_STARTED, CONTACT_US, DOWNLOAD, SUBSCRIBE
link_urlYeshttps destination URL (landing page, with UTMs)
companyIdYesFreedomOS company id to act within (you must be a member). Required for company-scoped tools.
objectiveNoOUTCOME_TRAFFIC (default) | OUTCOME_AWARENESS | OUTCOME_ENGAGEMENT
targetingNoAudience: {countries: ["US"], age_min, age_max, interests: [{id, name}]}
daily_budgetYesDaily budget in the account currency, major units (e.g. 25 = 25 USD/day)
primary_textYesThe ad copy (primary text)
ad_account_idNoAd account (act_<digits>). Optional when the connection has exactly one.
campaign_nameYesCampaign name, e.g. "PCAI cold traffic — Compliance Crusader v1"
image_artifact_idNoOptional agent_artifacts image id for the creative

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the ad draft is created in PAUSED state and spends nothing, and that activation is separate. It also mentions the sensitive-tier approval requirement. No contradictions.

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 description is two concise sentences plus a brief bracketed note. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and behavioral trait, then usage guidance, then approval context. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description adequately covers overall behavior, usage, and approval. It could be improved by mentioning what the tool returns (e.g., ID of created draft), but it is largely complete.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline 3.

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?

The description clearly states 'Create a complete Meta (Facebook/Instagram) ad draft — campaign + ad set + creative + ad — ALL in PAUSED state, spending nothing.' It specifies the verb 'create' and the resource 'ad draft', and distinguishes from sibling tools like set_meta_ad_status (activation) and update_meta_ad_budget.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly says 'Use when the user wants to set up or draft an ad. Activation is a separate human-approved step (set_meta_ad_status).' It also provides approval tier guidance in brackets, explaining when manager approval may be needed and how approval types work.

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

All freedom-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tool set is heavily disambiguated by detailed routing descriptions, domain prefixes, and lifecycle verbs, so most tools have a clear intended purpose. However, at 297 tools there are still close pairs and overlapping decision surfaces (e.g., approval workflows, 'what should I work on' readers, multiple finance/ads readers) that require careful description reading to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is predominantly consistent snake_case verb_noun with strong domain prefixes like shopify_, x_, posthog_, and list_/create_/update_ patterns. Minor inconsistencies exist, such as several collection-returning tools using get_ (get_team_members, get_icps, get_okrs) instead of list_, and some generate_ vs create_ vs draft_ verbs, but the pattern is still predictable overall.

Tool Count1/5

297 tools is an extreme outlier and far beyond a usable MCP tool surface. Even a large suite has no justification for this count in one server; the agent would struggle to select among hundreds of similarly descriptive tools, and the natural 3-15 tool range is exceeded by nearly 20x.

Completeness4/5

The individual domains represented — OKRs, CRM/leads, Shopify, content pipelines, ads, PostHog, team hiring, knowledge, finance, and session management — are covered remarkably well with full lifecycle patterns. Minor gaps exist, such as no full deal CRUD, no delete for several Google/Shopify artifacts, and some analytical surfaces being read-heavy, but most workflows can be completed without dead ends.

Resources