LeanrIQ

create creative strategy (deprecated alias)

leanriq_create_strategy

Idempotent

create creative strategy. Deprecated alias for create_creative_strategy. Classification: creates billable AI usage. Execution: synchronous. Task support: forbidden. Mutation modes: validate_only, preview_only, execute. Partial failure policy: completed_items_not_rolled_back. The returned JSON is internal application state for LeanrIQ and ChatGPT orchestration. Use assistantSummary first when responding to the user. Never display raw JSON, data, or meta unless the user explicitly asks for raw JSON. Mention IDs only when useful for follow-up or debugging. Prefer concise, human language, highlight the most useful insight, and suggest the next best LeanrIQ action. If idempotencyKey is omitted on a mutation, the MCP layer derives a deterministic retry key from the tool and business arguments so an accidental identical replay cannot create duplicate work.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`goal`	Yes
`brand`	Yes
`offer`	No
`seatId`	No
`channel`	No
`context`	No
`product`	Yes
`audience`	Yes
`seatName`	No
`constraints`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`meta`	Yes
`error`	No
`status`	Yes
`assistantSummary`	Yes

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: it creates billable AI usage, is synchronous, has mutation modes, a partial failure policy, and explains idempotency key derivation. These details are not present in the annotations, which only state idempotent, non-readonly, and non-destructive.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is lengthy and contains many generic instructions about response formatting and idempotency that are not specific to this tool. It starts with the core purpose but is overburdened with boilerplate, making it verbose for a deprecated alias.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While operational aspects (synchronous, mutation modes, failure policy) are covered, the description fails to explain any parameters, which is critical for a tool with 10 inputs. The output schema may help with return values, but the parameter gap prevents full usability.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention or explain any of the 10 parameters (e.g., brand, product, audience, goal). No guidance is provided on how to fill these fields, leaving a major gap.

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 'create creative strategy', clearly stating the verb and resource. It explicitly notes it is a deprecated alias for create_creative_strategy, distinguishing this tool from the canonical one.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Deprecated alias for create_creative_strategy', providing a strong when-not-to-use directive and naming the preferred alternative. This gives clear guidance despite the rest being operational details.

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

All LeanrIQ tools Inspect

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

C2.6/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

The tool set is dominated by deprecated aliases (leanriq_build_ad, leanriq_create_brief, etc.) that duplicate canonical tools exactly, and multiple high-level builders (build_ad, build_campaign_creative_set, leanriq_campaign_builder, launch_creative_campaign) overlap in purpose. An agent would struggle to pick the intended tool without inspecting full descriptions.

Naming Consistency2/5

Canonical tools follow a sensible verb_noun pattern (create_campaign, get_creative, list_flights), but the large number of 'leanriq_' prefixed aliases and special names like leanriq_campaign_builder create a mixed, inconsistent surface. The presence of both build_ad and leanriq_build_ad, or get_current_seat and leanriq_current_seat, breaks any predictable convention.

Tool Count1/5

87 tools is an extreme number for any MCP server, even a broad ad-platform API. The sheer volume, including many duplicate aliases, far exceeds a well-scoped set and will overwhelm agents with unnecessary choices.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is well covered: CRUD for advertisers, campaigns, flights, creatives, versions, assets, plus trafficking, QA, preview, and publishing. Minor gaps exist, such as the missing canonical create_creative_strategy (only a deprecated alias references it) and no direct update_creative, but the domain is functionally complete.

Resources

Need Help?