mcp-server

activate_ad

Destructive

Finish the setup wizard of an ad and ACTIVATE it. Use this when configure_ad_step reports nextStepType 'summary' and the user wants the ad live. In AUTO product mode this publishes EVERY matching product to the LIVE ad channel; for a test set manual mode first (set_ad_manual_mode) — see activationBehavior in get_ad. Returns {integrationId, stepType:'summary', status, nextStepType:null, transitions[], message}; 'validation_failed' when the product filter matches nothing. Export and submission run ASYNC — poll ad_status. Needs confirm:true after the user agrees. ad_id is from list_ads. project_id is OPTIONAL (inferred for a single-project customer; project_id_required otherwise — then call list_projects).

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": {
      "ad_id": "<ad_id>"
    },
    "name": "activate_ad"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ad_id`	Yes	integrationId of the ad (from list_ads).
`confirm`	No	true only after the user approved; without it the call returns confirm_required and nothing runs.
`project_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses that AUTO product mode publishes EVERY matching product to the LIVE channel (a destructive side effect that destructiveHint=true only hints at), that the call fails with 'validation_failed' when the product filter matches nothing, and that export/submission are async so ad_status must be polled. It also specifies the confirm-required behavior when confirm is absent.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and trigger, then the mode warning, return shape, and prerequisites in a logical order. It is dense and slightly crammed with parenthetical tool references, but essentially every clause carries operational information.

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?

For a destructive, async, wizard-finalizing mutation with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape, the failure case, the async follow-up tool, and the confirm gate. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67%, and the description fills the biggest hole: project_id has no schema description, but the text explains it is optional, inferred for single-project customers, and that project_id_required means calling list_projects. It also restates the confirm gate and traces ad_id to list_ads, though ad_id's own meaning is already in the schema.

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 and resource ('Finish the setup wizard of an ad and ACTIVATE it'), and the sibling names in the toolset (configure_ad_step, set_ad_manual_mode, ad_status) make the boundary crisp. An agent can distinguish this from activate_marketplace or resume_ad 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit trigger condition ('when configure_ad_step reports nextStepType summary and the user wants the ad live'), an explicit alternative for the test case ('for a test set manual mode first — set_ad_manual_mode'), and a prerequisite gate ('Needs confirm:true after the user agrees'). This is when/when-not/alternatives coverage in full.

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

All mcp-server 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?