Go Shift

Meta performance by product

meta_product_performance

Read-only

For catalog (Advantage+ catalog / dynamic product) ads: which products Meta showed and what they cost. Returns the top products by spend with impressions, link clicks, CTR, CPC and share of spend, for the account or one campaign. Read-only. Only ads that pull products from a catalog report a product; other ads are not included. Meta's product breakdown reports delivery and clicks per product; where it also returns purchases they are shown, otherwise judge purchases at ad or ad set level (meta_ads, meta_adsets).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "meta_product_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	How many products to list. Default 30.
`folder`	No	Client folder name.
`account`	No	Meta ad account name or ID (act_123 or 123). Optional when only one account is enabled.
`campaign`	No	Limit to one campaign (name or ID).
`end_date`	No
`language`	No	Language of the card: the language the user is writing in (ar for any Arabic dialect).
`date_range`	No
`start_date`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds genuinely new behavior: results are ranked by spend and limited to top products, catalog-derived products are the only ones reported, and purchase figures may be absent. It does not describe default ranking ties, date-range defaults, or how missing purchase data is signaled, which keeps it at a 4.

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?

The lead sentence front-loads purpose and scope, and each following sentence carries distinct information (metrics list, catalog-only restriction, purchase fallback). It is dense but earns its length; only the parenthetical 'Advantage+ catalog / dynamic product' is slightly redundant phrasing.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return burden and does so by listing the metrics and the top-by-spend ordering, plus data-availability caveats. Remaining gaps are date-range defaults, how limit interacts with ranking, and what the language parameter changes — minor for an 8-param read-only report.

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 63%, and the description only implicitly touches two parameters ('for the account or one campaign'), leaving limit, date_range, start/end dates, folder, and language entirely to the schema. With partial coverage the description neither compensates nor adds syntax or defaults, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('which products Meta showed and what they cost'), enumerates the returned metrics (impressions, link clicks, CTR, CPC, share of spend), and scopes it to catalog/Advantage+ product ads. This clearly separates it from broader performance siblings like meta_performance and from product-group equivalents on other platforms.

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?

It gives an explicit applicability condition ('For catalog / dynamic product ads') plus an exclusion ('Only ads that pull products from a catalog report a product; other ads are not included') and routes to meta_ads/meta_adsets when purchase data is missing. It stops short of naming the closest alternative for a general, non-product view, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All Go Shift 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?