Growomat

Get campaign

get_campaign

Read-only

Fetch one campaign by id. Returns the full campaign object. adScheduleStructured is the canonical weekly schedule (always present when a schedule is set) and adScheduleStructured.timezone is the effective IANA zone; adSchedule echoes the legacy enum when one was used. adScheduleUseSearcherTimeZone (Microsoft only) indicates the schedule is interpreted in the searcher's local time. Scoped to the active Space — see set_active_space to switch, or pass space_id to override for this one call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`space_id`	No	Override the active Space for this one call. Defaults to the active Space set via set_active_space (or GROWOMAT_SPACE_ID on the server). Pass to read/write a different Space without changing the session binding.
`campaign_id`	Yes	Campaign id (as returned by list_campaigns).

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behavioral nuances: adScheduleStructured is canonical, adSchedule is a legacy echo, timezone semantics, and the Microsoft-only searcher timezone flag. It also clarifies that scoping defaults to the active Space and can be overridden, which is essential operational knowledge.

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 description is well-structured, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses subsequent sentences for schedule field clarifications and scoping. It is slightly dense with adSchedule technical details, but each sentence contributes meaningful information and there is no fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes on the burden of explaining return value nuances. It thoroughly covers the tricky adSchedule fields, timezone behavior, and Space scoping, leaving little ambiguity for the agent. The only omission is error/not-found behavior, but that is not critical for a get-by-id tool.

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 for parameters is 100%, with detailed descriptions for both campaign_id and space_id. The tool description does not add new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already states; it merely restates the scoping override concept. This meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Fetch one campaign by id." It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_campaigns and get_campaign_asset by focusing on a single campaign object retrieval. The mention of returning "the full campaign object" further reinforces its singular scope.

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 description explains the active Space scoping and explicitly points to set_active_space and the optional space_id override for one-off calls. It does not explicitly contrast with list_campaigns, but the context implies use cases for fetching a single known campaign.

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

All Growomat tools Inspect

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

Most tools follow a clear resource+action pattern (get_ad, update_ad, delete_ad), so entity-level tools are easy to distinguish. The main ambiguity is among reporting/status tools like get_conversion_status, get_conversion_health, get_conversion_report, and account_summary vs. get_performance_stats, which could tempt misselection without reading descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

Naming is highly consistent: nearly every resource has create_/get_/update_/delete_/list_ variants, with predictable special verbs like set_, trigger_, preview_, and upload_. Minor exceptions like account_summary or get_angle_readout still follow the same readable verb-driven style.

Tool Count1/5

83 tools is an extreme surface for an MCP server, even one covering ad management. Most entities have full CRUD plus many custom readouts and report variants, which creates context bloat and makes tool selection unnecessarily expensive for the agent.

Completeness4/5

The platform covers the full campaign lifecycle: campaigns, ad groups, ads, keywords, assets, business/creative planes, conversion actions, sync, budget, and targeting are all represented. Minor gaps exist—conversion sources have create/list but no get/update/delete, and there is no explicit way to update or remove a conversion source—but these can be worked around.

Resources

Need Help?