Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SiteCheck Web Intel

by io.github.bck-stack
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Google Ads Transparency Center: search advertisers by name

search_google_ads
Read-only

Google Ads Transparency Center: search advertisers by name or domain (verified name, advertiser ID, country, approximate ad count), or list the ads of an advertiser ID or website domain (creative ID, format, first and last shown dates, days shown, preview URL, Transparency Center link), optionally for one country; plus the approximate total number of ads. Related tools on this server, for a different need: search_google_news when you need Google News search: headline, publisher, publish time; search_google_search when you need Organic web search results from the Brave Search API: rank. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_google_ads"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoAdvertiser name or domain to search, e.g. nike (returns advertisers)
limitNoAds to return, 1 to 100 (default 40)
domainNoWebsite domain to list ads pointing to it, e.g. nike.com
regionNoOptional country code (US, GB, DE, TR...) or Google geo criteria ID for ads shown there
advertiserIdNoAdvertiser ID (AR + 20 digits) to list its ads

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds behavior the annotations cannot convey: cost of $0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 across specific chains, and that failed calls are not charged — genuinely decision-relevant for an agent. It omits pagination/result-volume behavior and what a zero-result response looks like, which would be the extra step to a 5.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core is delivered as one long run-on sentence with multiple nested parentheticals listing return fields, which are redundant given an output schema exists. The purpose and alternates are present but not cleanly front-loaded, and the field enumeration bloats the definition.

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 an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description supplies what those structures can't: dual-mode operation, country scoping, and full pricing/payment model. It is nearly complete for a read-only search tool; only result-set behavior (default volume, empty results, truncation) is left unstated.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by explaining what each parameter mode yields (q returns advertisers with verified name/advertiser ID/country/ad count; domain and advertiserId list creatives) and that region is an optional single-country filter. That mode-to-parameter mapping is meaning the schema alone doesn't spell out.

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 names specific verbs and resources: search advertisers by name or domain, list ads for an advertiser ID or website domain, plus an approximate total ad count. It also explicitly disambiguates from sibling search tools (search_google_news, search_google_search) by stating what each covers, so an agent can route without opening a schema.

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?

It signals the two operating modes implicitly through the parameters (q/name returns advertisers; advertiserId or domain lists ads), and it explicitly names alternative tools with the condition that selects them ("search_google_news when you need Google News search"). It doesn't state when-not to use this tool (e.g., that a name query will not return ads directly), which keeps it from a 5.

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

All SiteCheck Web Intel toolsInspect
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