SiteCheck Web Intel

LinkedIn Ad Library search: up to 24 ads per page with ad

seo_linkedin_ad_library

Read-only

LinkedIn Ad Library search (ads LinkedIn discloses publicly, including EU/EEA): up to 24 ads per page with ad id, advertiser, format (single image, video, carousel, document), creative type, tagline, ad text, links and detail link. Search by keyword and/or advertiser, optionally one country and a time window. From linkedin.com/ad-library via a residential proxy. Price: $0.01 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": "seo_linkedin_ad_library"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`period`	No	Optional: last-30-days, current-month, current-year, last-year
`country`	No	Optional two-letter country code where the ad ran, e.g. US, DE
`keyword`	No	Words in the ad, e.g. software, cybersecurity
`advertiser`	No	Advertiser (company) name, e.g. Microsoft

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds substantial context: the data source (linkedin.com/ad-library via residential proxy), page size (24 ads), and a full cost model ($0.01 USDC per successful call via x402, failed calls uncharged), which is critical for an agent deciding whether to invoke. The only gap is that it mentions 'per page' without explaining how (or whether) further pages can be retrieved, since the schema exposes no page parameter.

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?

Two sentences, both dense with useful content, with the core identity front-loaded and commercial terms last. Some field enumeration (creative type, detail link) is redundant given the output schema, adding minor bulk.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description need not explain returns, yet it does so usefully; source, cost, and filters are all covered. The missing piece is result-set behavior (pagination or total volume), which matters for a search tool capped at 24 ads per page.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameter meanings are already documented with examples. The description adds only the combination rule (keyword and/or advertiser) and that country is limited to one, which is mild value above the schema 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 names a specific verb and resource (LinkedIn Ad Library search), states exactly what is covered (ads LinkedIn discloses publicly, including EU/EEA) and enumerates the returned fields. An agent can distinguish it from sibling tools like search_google_ads or generic web search without opening the 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 gives clear operating context: search by keyword and/or advertiser, optionally one country and a time window, which tells the agent how the filters compose. It stops short of explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or naming an alternative ad-library source.

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 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?