Skip to main content
Glama

Opus Growth, Ad Platforms MCP Connector

Set Campaign Business Name

manage_business_name
Destructive

Fixes the BUSINESS NAME shown in a campaign's ads — the one place a typo is visible to every person who sees the ad, and until now there was no way to correct it.

Text assets in Google Ads are IMMUTABLE: asset.text_asset.text cannot be edited, which is why no update tool could exist. The correct operation is a RELINK, and this tool does it in one atomic request: it finds an asset in the account that already carries the exact text you want (so a name you already use elsewhere is REUSED instead of duplicated), creates one only if none exists, links it to the campaign as BUSINESS_NAME and unlinks the old one in the same mutate — a campaign accepts only one business name, so the swap has to happen together.

Call it with text empty to READ what the campaign shows today without changing anything. confirm=false returns a dry run naming the old and the new text; confirm=true applies it and reads the value back from Google. Fixing a name used by several campaigns means calling this once per campaign, because the link is per campaign.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNo
confirmNo
campaign_idYes
customer_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Added
  8. Removed
  9. Added
  10. Removed
  11. Added
  12. Removed
  13. Added
  14. Removed
  15. Added
  16. Removed
  17. Added
  18. Removed
  19. Added
  20. Removed
  21. Added
  22. Removed
  23. Added
  24. Removed
  25. Added
  26. Removed
  27. Added
  28. Removed
  29. Added
  30. Removed
  31. Added
  32. Removed
  33. Added
  34. Removed
  35. Added
  36. Removed
  37. Added
  38. Removed
  39. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite annotations already flagging destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, the description adds rich behavioral detail: the operation reuses an existing asset rather than duplicating, creates one only if absent, links and unlinks in a single atomic mutate, and verify-reads the value from Google. This is context the annotations cannot convey.

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?

The key insight (relink, not edit) is front-loaded, and every sentence adds information about mechanism, modes, or constraints. It is a little long and leans on capitalized emphasis, but there is no filler or repetition.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a genuinely complex mutation with a dry-run mode and an atomic relink, the description covers mechanism, safety, invocation modes, and per-campaign scope. An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden, and it does so well for the two optional parameters: 'text' empty means read-only, and confirm=false means dry-run while true applies. 'campaign_id' is implicitly covered by the per-campaign note, but 'customer_id' gets no explanation.

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 states a specific verb and resource in the first clause — fixing the BUSINESS NAME shown in a campaign's ads — and immediately frames the real mechanism (a RELINK, not an edit) so the agent understands what the tool actually does. No sibling tool covers campaign business naming, so differentiation is inherent.

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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool (a typo that must be corrected in a live ad), why no normal update tool could exist (immutable text assets), and how to invoke it in read-only mode ('text' empty) versus apply mode (confirm=true). It even notes the one-call-per-campaign constraint when several campaigns share a name.

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.