mcp-server

get_ad

Read-only

Get the full detail of one ad: identity + state + the configuration wizard steps. CRITICAL — read activationBehavior in the RESULT: 'summary_step_activates_and_submits_all' means completing the wizard's SUMMARY step ACTIVATES the ad and publishes EVERY matching product to the LIVE channel (spends budget), so to test safely set MANUAL mode FIRST (set_ad_product_mode) — it then reads 'summary_step_activates_no_auto_submit' and activation auto-submits nothing; 'already_active' = already live. Ads are ads-based channels (advertising / price-comparison / classifieds), not marketplaces: they publish products to the ad platform and have no order sync. Returns {integrationId, projectId, name, channelCode, kind:'ads', definitionCode, status, ready, lastStep, isReady, isConnected, isOverlimit, primarySync, orderSync, productMode, orderMode, taxonomyCode, categoryMappingRequired, connectionStatus, connectionMessage, connectionExpiresAt, steps:[{type, label, sort, index, ready, current, fields:[{code, label, type, required, options, optionsSource, htmlAttributes, value, help, showIf, hiddenIf}]}], editUrl, activationBehavior}. steps describe the setup wizard: 'current' is the next step to configure (via configure_ad_step, targeting it by its index — two steps can share a type) and 'ready' marks completed steps. fields is the step's input schema: for a form/order-settings step, build configure_ad_step payload {items:{code:value}} from it — required marks mandatory fields, options is the allowed value set (value→label), htmlAttributes carry constraints, value is the current value. Steps with an empty fields list take a structured payload instead. The connection/auth step (OAuth or credentials) is NOT configurable via MCP: the user completes it in the browser / Koongo UI, and configure_ad_step returns oauth_required / credentials_in_ui for it — terminal, never retry it with a payload. Each ad owns exactly ONE connection (never shared): connectionStatus is its health (NEW / OK / WARNING / ERROR / EXPIRED), connectionMessage/connectionExpiresAt add detail, and test_ad_connection re-checks it live. taxonomyCode is set AUTOMATICALLY from the channel and is READ-ONLY — it cannot be changed via MCP; category mapping (a wizard step) maps your store categories TO this fixed taxonomy, and categoryMappingRequired says whether that step applies. Secrets are never returned. ad_id is the id from list_ads / create_ad. project_id is OPTIONAL (inferred for a single-project customer; project_id_required otherwise — then call list_projects). Use get_ad for configuration and ad_status for run progress.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ad_id`	Yes
`project_id`	No

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this read-only, but the description adds critical behavioral context: activationBehavior values reveal whether the wizard's summary step activates/publishes to LIVE, connection steps are not configurable via MCP and return terminal oauth_required/credentials_in_ui errors, secrets are never returned, and each ad owns exactly one connection. No statement contradicts the readOnlyHint.

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 text is long and dense, with many clauses packed around the returned fields, but every section adds useful behavior or routing context and the critical activation warning is prominent. It would benefit from paragraph breaks, but it is front-loaded with purpose and safety.

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 enumerates the full return shape ({integrationId, ..., activationBehavior}) and explains the semantics of the complex parts: steps/current/ready/fields, connectionStatus values, taxonomyCode read-only behavior, and the way to build configure_ad_step payloads. For a complex read tool this is complete enough for an agent to call and interpret it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description carries the burden. It explains ad_id's source (list_ads/create_ad) and project_id's optional/inference rule, including the project_id_required fallback to list_projects. This adds real meaning beyond the bare integer types.

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 'Get the full detail of one ad: identity + state + the configuration wizard steps' — a specific verb, resource, and return scope. It also distinguishes ads-based channels from marketplaces and points to ad_status for run progress, so it is not confused with sibling getters.

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?

It explicitly states 'Use get_ad for configuration and ad_status for run progress,' separating this tool from its closest sibling. It also tells where parameter values come from ('ad_id is the id from list_ads / create_ad'; 'call list_projects' when project_id_required) and that connection/auth is completed in the browser, not via MCP.

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

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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized around distinct resources (ads, marketplaces, feeds, orders, rules, sources) with clear action verbs, and descriptions explicitly disambiguate near-pairs like get_feed_status vs ad_status or set_feed_filter vs set_feed_attribute_filter. A few similarly named status/action pairs (e.g. ad_status vs get_ad, run_ad_item_action vs run_ad_operation) require careful reading, but overall the purposes are separable.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_*, get_*, create_*, set_*, run_*, test_*). Minor deviations like ad_status and marketplace_status (noun-based status tools) and koongo_knowledge break the pattern slightly, but the convention is clearly recognizable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

At 105 tools, the surface is extreme and far beyond the 50+ threshold, even for a complex e-commerce integration domain. Much of the bloat comes from systematic triplication across ads, marketplaces, and feeds (e.g. three nearly identical map_*_attribute tools, three list_*_items, three get_*_report) that a generic resource parameter could have consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the full lifecycle of feeds, ads, marketplaces, order connections, rules, and imports, including create/read/update/delete, status monitoring, item-level actions, validation, repair, and restore. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete for standalone order connections and limited update capabilities for some entities, but these are workable and do not create dead ends for the core workflows.

Resources

Need Help?