Idea Launch

Generate ad copy and messaging

idealaunch_generate_ad_assets

Generate the ad creative for an idea: tagline, primary and secondary ad text, an image prompt, and sign-up page copy.

Requires a complete brief (target customer, why they'd care, current alternative and primary market); returns an error naming the missing fields otherwise.

Args:

ideaId (string)
save (boolean): when true, writes the generated copy onto the idea. Defaults to false, which returns the copy without saving it.

Returns: { ideaId, saved, assets: { tagline, adPrimaryText, adSecondaryText, imagePrompt, signupLearnMoreMarkdown, signupThemePreset }, note }.

It does NOT write the sign-up page headline, description or CTA; those are separate brief fields, and the conversion-destination check requires them.

Consumes one of the idea's AI generation turns. Costs no Ad Run credit.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ideaId": "<ideaId>"
    },
    "name": "idealaunch_generate_ad_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`save`	No
`ideaId`	Yes
`response_format`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=false) by disclosing the cost model — consumes one AI generation turn but no Ad Run credit — plus the exact set of required brief fields, the error behavior when they're absent, and the precise scope boundary of what it does not write. That scope boundary is genuinely non-obvious and prevents a downstream failure the agent would otherwise hit.

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?

Front-loaded with the outcome, then preconditions, then args, then return shape — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The 'Args: - ideaId (string)' line restates only the type and earns nothing, since the useful save semantics are already covered in the prose above.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description spells out the return object (ideaId, saved, assets with all six subfields, note), so an agent knows what it receives. Combined with the error behavior, cost accounting, and the explicit non-coverage of sign-up headline/description/CTA, there is nothing material an agent would need that is left out.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden and does partially: it explains save's default (false) and the consequence of true (writes copy onto the idea), which is not inferable from the schema. However, response_format (markdown|json enum) is never mentioned, leaving one of three parameters entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb 'generate' plus resource 'ad creative' with an explicit enumeration of the artifacts produced (tagline, primary/secondary ad text, image prompt, sign-up page copy). The inclusion of 'image prompt' implicitly separates it from idealaunch_generate_hero_image, but no sibling is named, so the differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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?

Clear preconditions: the idea must have a complete brief (target customer, why they'd care, current alternative, primary market) or the call errors naming the missing fields, and the sign-up headline/description/CTA must already exist for the conversion-destination check. What's missing is explicit routing — nothing says when to call this versus draft_brief or generate_hero_image, and there are no exclusions beyond the sign-up-page fields it declines to write.

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

All Idea Launch 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.