Metadata MCP Connector

Create Google Ads Lead Form Extension

create_google_lead_form_extension

Add an inline lead-capture form attached to a Google Ads ad — prospects submit their email plus optional contact and work info without leaving the SERP. Drives higher conversion than landing-page redirects and feeds leads straight into Metadata.

            ALSO KNOWN AS: lead form, lead gen form, inline form, lead capture, contact form, demo request form, in-ad form, form extension

            KEYWORDS: lead form, lead gen, lead capture, form, contact form, demo request, inline form, conversion, MQL, opt-in, signup, registration, google ads, extension

            WHEN TO USE:
            - "Add a lead form extension to capture demo requests under our search ads"
            - "Create an inline form asking for work email and job title"
            - "Set up a Google Ads lead-gen form with a 'Request Demo' CTA"
            - "Register a contact-us form extension for the homepage campaign"

            WHEN NOT TO USE:
            - Just want to drive clicks to a landing page (no inline form) → use create_google_sitelink_extension
            - Want to plug a single product / pricing tier under the ad → use create_google_price_extension
            - For Microsoft Ads / Bing — Microsoft does not surface inline lead forms via the platform; pick a different extension type or use a landing-page redirect.
            - For Facebook lead forms or LinkedIn LeadGen — those are separate channel surfaces, not search-channel ad-extensions.

            INPUTS (required):
            - headline:                          form headline (≤30 chars).
            - business_name:                     advertiser name shown in form (≤25 chars).
            - privacy_policy_url:                link to your privacy policy (Google requires it).
            - post_submit_headline:              thank-you screen headline (≤30 chars).
            - post_submit_description:           thank-you screen body (≤200 chars).
            - post_submit_call_to_action_type:   button on the thank-you screen. VISIT_SITE | DOWNLOAD | LEARN_MORE | SHOP_NOW.
            - call_to_action_type:               main CTA on the ad. APPLY_NOW | BOOK_NOW | CONTACT_US | DOWNLOAD | GET_INFO | GET_OFFER | GET_QUOTE | GET_STARTED | JOIN_NOW | LEARN_MORE | REGISTER | REQUEST_DEMO | SIGN_UP | SUBSCRIBE.
            - call_to_action_description:        sub-text under the CTA (≤30 chars).
            - email_lead_form_user_input_types:  at least one of WORK_EMAIL, EMAIL.

            INPUTS (optional):
            - description: form body text (≤200 chars).
            - contact_lead_form_user_input_types: any of FIRST_NAME, LAST_NAME, PHONE_NUMBER, CITY, POSTAL_CODE, REGION, COUNTRY, STREET_ADDRESS.
            - work_lead_form_user_input_types:    any of COMPANY_NAME, JOB_TITLE, WORK_PHONE.
            - url: thank-you-page URL after submit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	Optional thank-you-page URL.
`headline`	Yes
`description`	No
`business_name`	Yes
`privacy_policy_url`	Yes
`call_to_action_type`	Yes
`post_submit_headline`	Yes
`post_submit_description`	Yes
`call_to_action_description`	Yes
`post_submit_call_to_action_type`	Yes
`work_lead_form_user_input_types`	No
`email_lead_form_user_input_types`	Yes
`contact_lead_form_user_input_types`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description goes beyond merely confirming a write operation by adding that the form 'feeds leads straight into Metadata' and operates as an inline element on the SERP, which is useful behavioral context not present in the annotations.

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 description is well-structured with clear headers and a front-loaded first sentence. However, the 'ALSO KNOWN AS' and 'KEYWORDS' sections are largely redundant with the body and add length without new information, slightly reducing conciseness.

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?

For a complex 13-parameter creation tool with 9 required fields, the description covers parameter semantics, use cases, alternatives, and exclusions thoroughly. It does not mention how the tool identifies the target ad/campaign (no campaign_id in the schema) or what it returns, which are minor gaps but not critical given the rich behavioral and usage context provided.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 8%, so the description carries the full burden of parameter documentation. It lists all required and optional inputs with clear semantics, character limits (e.g., '≤30 chars'), enums (e.g., call_to_action_type), and grouping (email, contact, work fields), adding substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('inline lead-capture form attached to a Google Ads ad'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming alternatives (create_google_sitelink_extension, create_google_price_extension) in the 'WHEN NOT TO USE' section.

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 'WHEN TO USE' section provides concrete example utterances, and the 'WHEN NOT TO USE' section gives explicit conditions and alternative tools (sitelink, price extension) plus channel exclusions (Microsoft, Facebook, LinkedIn). This leaves no ambiguity about when to invoke this tool.

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

All Metadata MCP Connector 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?