Skip to main content
Glama

facebook_ad_library_search_companies

Find Meta Ad Library pages by brand — name-matched, pageId for company-ads (not profileId). Costs 2 credits. Empty results and failures are never charged. Pass cache=true for a free 24h cache hit (default always fresh).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesCompany or brand name to search for (min 2 characters). Name-matched — off-brand pages are dropped.
cacheNoSet true to serve from the 24h response cache (0 credits on hit). Default false — always fetch fresh.
limitNoMax items to return (default 20, max 200). Flat 2 credits per call.
countryNoTwo-letter ISO country code. Default US.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses pricing (2 credits), that empty results/failures are free, cache behavior (cache=true gives free hit, default fresh), and the output nature (pageId for company-ads, not profileId). This is substantial behavioral context beyond a simple 'find' statement.

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?

Three short sentences, all earning their place. The first sentence delivers the core purpose with key differentiators, the second covers pricing and failure policy, the third gives the cache hint. No redundant or speculative content.

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?

For a 4-param search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, cost, failure policy, cache behavior, and ID type. It doesn't explicitly describe the return list shape, but the 'pageId for company-ads' phrase conveys the essential output. Most of the missing parameter details are in the 100%-covered schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying the result contains pageId for company-ads (not profileId), which is not in the schema. It also reiterates cache=true for free hit, reinforcing the schema. This exceeds the baseline.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Find Meta Ad Library pages by brand.' It adds two differentiating details: results are name-matched and return pageId for company-ads (not profileId). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like facebook_ad_library_search and facebook_ad_library_company_ads.

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?

The description gives clear context: this is for finding Meta Ad Library pages by brand name, name-matched, with pageId output. It doesn't name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, but the purpose implies the appropriate scenario. Cache and cost behavior also guide usage.

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.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The platform-prefix convention keeps most of the 178 tools clearly separated, but several clusters are genuinely ambiguous: tiktok_live_info is explicitly described as 'Identical to TikTok Live', instagram_basic_profile and instagram_channel_details both return profile stats, and facebook_profile_posts overlaps with facebook_profile_reels. The generic 'Summarizer' descriptions for facebook_summarize, instagram_summarize, and tiktok_summarize provide no disambiguating detail at all.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant snake_case platform_resource_suffix pattern is followed remarkably consistently across 178 tools (e.g. youtube_channel_videos, tiktok_search_users, reddit_subreddit_posts). Minor deviations exist: the same creator resource is called 'channel' in some tools (tiktok_channel_details, instagram_channel_posts) but 'profile' or 'user' in others (facebook_profile_posts, twitch_user_videos, linnkme_profile); link-in-bio tools mostly use _page but linkme uses _profile; and the video_summarize/video_transcript pair lacks a platform prefix.

Tool Count2/5

At 178 tools this is far beyond what any agent can efficiently navigate in a single flat namespace, and even individual platform subsets exceed reasonable bounds (TikTok alone has ~34 tools, YouTube ~25). The sheer breadth of the multi-platform scope partially justifies the count, but the server would be far more usable split into per-platform servers.

Completeness4/5

The read-only data surface is impressively thorough: nearly every platform has profile + content + search + comments coverage, and TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook are covered end-to-end including shops, ads, transcripts, and summaries. Notable gaps are minor: Twitter has no keyword search tool, LinkedIn lacks comments, and Reddit has no user-profile endpoint, but none of these create dead ends for the server's core data-retrieval purpose.