mcp-server

set_ad_auto_mode

Destructive

Switch an ad to AUTOMATIC product mode: every matching product is published to the LIVE ad channel and kept in sync, and a submission is queued right away. Use this when the user wants ongoing automatic publishing. Each call queues the submission again, even when already automatic — do not retry blindly. Returns {integrationId, action:'set_product_mode', status, kind:'ads', editUrl, message}. 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": "set_ad_auto_mode"
  }
}

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?

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds real substance on top: each call re-queues the submission even when already automatic, and products go LIVE on the ad channel. It also discloses the confirm gate behavior (confirm_required, nothing runs) and the return payload, which annotations cannot cover.

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 mode switch and its effect, then prerequisites, then the return shape — a sensible ordering with no filler sentences. The one weakness is the inline enumeration of return fields, which is dense and only marginally useful to an agent deciding whether to call.

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 supplies the response shape; with three parameters and a destructive non-idempotent mutation, it supplies the confirmation gate, the retry caveat, and the prerequisite lookup. Nothing material for correct invocation 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 plugs the main gap: project_id is documented as OPTIONAL, inferred for single-project customers, and requires list_projects when the API returns project_id_required. ad_id's provenance (list_ads) is repeated from the schema but harmless; no format or syntax details are added beyond 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?

"Switch an ad to AUTOMATIC product mode" names a specific verb and resource, and the description immediately spells out the consequences: every matching product is published to the LIVE channel, kept in sync, and a submission is queued. An agent can tell this apart from set_ad_manual_mode without consulting another 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?

"Use this when the user wants ongoing automatic publishing" gives the selecting condition, and "do not retry blindly" provides an explicit when-not-to. It also names the prerequisite chain (confirm:true after user agreement, ad_id from list_ads, project_id fallback to list_projects on project_id_required).

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?