Metadata MCP Connector

Get Budget Group

get_budget_group

Read-only

Get configuration and settings for a budget group (NOT performance data).

            KEYWORDS: budget, group, settings, configuration, details, allocation, campaigns

            WHEN TO USE:
            - "Show me the [group name] budget group settings/configuration"
            - "What campaigns are in the [group name] budget group?"
            - "What's the budget allocation for [group name]?"
            - Getting budget group metadata without performance metrics

            WHEN NOT TO USE:
            - Performance questions (spend, CPL, leads, conversions) → use budget_group_performance instead
            - Questions like "how did X perform" or "total spend for X" → use budget_group_performance instead

            NOTE: If the user is asking about performance metrics (spend, leads, CPL, etc.),
            use budget_group_performance directly - it accepts the name and handles ID lookup internally.

            Returns complete budget group information including campaigns, budget allocation, and settings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	The name of the budget group to search for. Example: 'Brand'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by clarifying the tool returns configuration and settings rather than performance data, and it specifies the output contains campaigns, budget allocation, and settings. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 sections, but it is somewhat verbose with multiple example phrases and a note. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and uses formatting (caps, line breaks) to aid scanning. It earns its length by providing actionable routing and examples, though a trim would not hurt.

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 simple one-parameter getter with annotations and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, exclusions, and return content. It explicitly distinguishes from the performance sibling and even notes the alternative's ID handling. No additional information is needed for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the single 'name' parameter, which is already described with an example. The description does not add further parameter-specific semantics; its examples are usage phrasings rather than parameter details. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema fully documents the parameter.

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: 'Get configuration and settings for a budget group' and explicitly clarifies it is NOT performance data. It also provides keywords and example queries, making the purpose unmistakable and distinct from the sibling budget_group_performance.

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 has dedicated 'WHEN TO USE' and 'WHEN NOT TO USE' sections with concrete example phrasings, and it explicitly names the alternative tool (budget_group_performance) for performance questions, including a note that the alternative handles ID lookup internally. This is explicit routing guidance.

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?