Skip to main content
Glama

Ads Libraries MCP by InsightfulPipe

Ads Libraries Data Query

query_data
Read-only

Execute Ads Libraries queries (Step 3 (FINAL) of workflow).

REQUIRED: Complete these steps first using query_contexts:

  1. request='accounts' - Get workspace_id, brand_id AND available_actions

  2. request='actions_details' with actions=['xxxxxx'] - Get detailed body structure (replace xxxxxx with actions from available_actions)

Rely on info from steps 1-2 to construct the query body. Follow the schema exactly.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "query_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful workflow context and prerequisite sequencing, but it does not explain the implications of open-world access, return behavior, or failure conditions.

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 front-loaded and mostly efficient, with the workflow sequence stated before the body-construction guidance. Some parenthetical and placeholder notation is slightly cryptic but not wasteful.

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 dynamic body parameter and the presence of an output schema, the description provides the essential prerequisite workflow and points to query_contexts for body construction. It is reasonably complete, though more detail on query body expectations would help.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the opaque body parameter. It partially does so by directing the agent to query_contexts actions_details for the body structure, but it does not describe body fields directly.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific action and resource: executing Ads Libraries queries as the final workflow step. It is clearer than a generic 'query data' label, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling execute_action.

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 explicit prerequisite steps using query_contexts and identifies this as Step 3 (FINAL). It does not state exclusions, but the required sequence is clear enough to guide invocation.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.