Skip to main content
Glama

TrueClicks

by com.trueclicks

Current pacing & efficiency targets

target_pacing
Read-only

Get the current active pacing and efficiency targets (pacers) as JSONL. Not just budget: covers pacing targets (Cost, Clicks, Conversions, Conversion Value; Type = Pacing) and efficiency targets (CPC, ROAS, CPA, ACOS; Type = Efficiency). Each line carries the target metric, target value, value to date, pacing percentage, projected value, and target status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountIdsNoOptional TrueClicks account ids to limit the result to (the numeric Id field from the account listing). Omit to return all accounts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / accountIds / description
      Previous value: -"Optional account IDs to limit the result to. Omit to return all accounts."New value: +"Optional TrueClicks account ids to limit the result to (the numeric Id field from the account listing). Omit to return all accounts."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations already cover the non-mutating behavior, and the description consistently describes a read operation. It adds useful output-format context but no conflicting behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact but information-dense, using two sentences to convey purpose, scope, output format, target categories, and included fields. No unnecessary filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the fields contained in each line. It lacks details on error conditions or ordering, but for a simple read-only getter it is sufficiently complete.

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 only parameter, accountIds, is fully described in the schema with its optionality, meaning, source of valid values, and default behavior when omitted. No ambiguity remains.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves current active pacing and efficiency targets as JSONL, and explicitly distinguishes the scope from budget-only targets. The resource and purpose are unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Describes what the tool covers and that it returns active targets, but does not explicitly compare it to sibling tools such as target_pacing_all or state when one should be preferred over the other.

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

All TrueClicks toolsInspect
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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but the audit and report tools (e.g., audit_rule_output_table vs audit_rule_output_table_historical vs audit_rule_result vs audit_rule_result_campaign) are closely related and rely on detailed descriptions to differentiate.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is generally consistent with snake_case and domain-prefixed groups (google_ads_*, ms_ads_*, perfmon_*), though a few tools are bare nouns (account, task, user) rather than verb-led, which slightly deviates from the dominant pattern.

Tool Count4/5

23 tools is on the higher end but justified for a platform covering multiple ad platforms, audit reports, alerts, and user management; it remains navigable with clear groupings.

Completeness4/5

The tool set comprehensively covers account enumeration, audit results, report execution for major ad platforms, perfmon alerts, pacing targets, tasks, and users. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no create/update/modify operations), but the core analytics and monitoring surface is well covered.

Resources