gads_get_campaignGet detailed settings for a specific campaign. Returns name, status, budget, bidding strategy, and configuration. Use to review or audit a campaign's current setup.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| campaign_id | Yes | The campaign resource ID | |
| customer_id | Yes | Google Ads customer ID |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| results | No | Campaign details from GAQL search |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "results": {
+ "description": "Campaign details from GAQL search",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "campaign": {
+ "description": "Campaign resource data",
+ "properties": {
+ "advertising_channel_type": {
+ "description": "Advertising channel type",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "bidding_strategy_type": {
+ "description": "Bidding strategy type",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "end_date": {
+ "description": "Campaign end date",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Campaign ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Campaign name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "serving_status": {
+ "description": "Campaign serving status",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "start_date": {
+ "description": "Campaign start date",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "status": {
+ "description": "Campaign status",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "campaign_budget": {
+ "description": "Campaign budget information",
+ "properties": {
+ "amount_micros": {
+ "description": "Budget amount in micros",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "delivery_method": {
+ "description": "Budget delivery method",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "campaign_id": "9876543210",
+ "customer_id": "1234567890"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond its basic function. It does not contradict annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences efficiently convey the action, returned data, and use case. No extraneous information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read tool with annotations and output schema present, the description covers purpose, usage, and key return fields. It is sufficient for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema; it simply reinforces that the tool gets settings for a campaign, which implies the campaign_id parameter.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'specific campaign', and lists returned fields (name, status, budget, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like 'gads_list_campaigns' and 'gads_campaign_metrics' by focusing on detailed settings of a single campaign.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly advises 'Use to review or audit a campaign's current setup', providing clear guidance. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., using gads_campaign_metrics for metrics, or gads_list_campaigns for listing).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The five gads_* tools are distinct, but the majority of the surface is a sprawling research/meta toolkit with many overlapping retrieval entry points: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, suggest_questions, validate_claim, entity_profile, compare_entities, recent_changes, and search_within all cover overlapping information-query territory. An agent could easily misroute a question among the ask_pipeworx variants or between the general-query and company-profile tools.
Domain prefixes like gads_, polymarket_, and ask_pipeworx_ provide some structure, but naming conventions are mixed: gads_list_campaigns and list_subscriptions follow verb_noun, while entity_profile, ai_visibility_check, remember, and generate_llms_txt do not. The names are readable and grouped by prefix, but they do not form one consistent pattern.
At 36 tools this is a large surface, and the count becomes even more problematic because the server is named Google_ads while only 5 of the 36 tools relate to Google Ads. The other 31 tools are a broad Pipeworx data-research, prediction-market, memory, and subscription utility set, which makes the server feel bloated and mis-scoped for its advertised purpose.
As a Google Ads server, the surface is read-only and incomplete: it can list campaigns and ad groups, get campaign details, pull metrics, and run GAQL, but it cannot create, update, or delete campaigns, manage budgets and bids, or handle keywords, audiences, or ad creatives. The many unrelated data-research tools do not address these core Google Ads management gaps.