Skip to main content
Glama

Metadata MCP Connector

Remove Audiences from Campaign

remove_audiences_from_campaign
Destructive

Remove specific audiences from one or more channels in an existing campaign.

            Use this tool when you need to detach a named audience/group from a particular
            channel (e.g. remove "European Digital Nomad Investors" from FACEBOOK).
            Channel and audience IDs are resolved internally — you only need the human-readable
            channel type and audience name.

            Works on both campaign structures. On a Channel-First / Native (N×N×N) campaign the
            audience is cleared from its WizNativeAdContainer(s); any container then left with no
            asset at all (no audience, target group, keyword, ad or offer) is dropped, and on a
            draft the audience's group is deleted from the channel, so the campaign no longer
            lists it. A container left holding ads with nothing to target them is named in the
            removal message.

            KEYWORDS: remove, delete, audience, group, channel, campaign, targeting

            WHEN TO USE:
            - User wants to remove a specific audience from a channel
            - User wants to clean up audiences from one or more channels (targeting groups:
              remove_target_groups_from_campaign)
            - Multiple audiences across multiple channels can be removed in a single call

            RESPONSE:
            - Returns the refreshed campaign state plus a removal_results list with one
              entry per requested removal recording its success or error. ALWAYS check
              removal_results — a partial failure (e.g. one of two names not found) still
              returns normally, so report only what actually came back successful.

            REQUIRED PARAMETERS:
            - campaign_id: Campaign ID (numeric identifier)
            - channel_audiences: Object mapping channel type → list of audience names to remove

            CHANNEL TYPES: FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, GOOGLE_ADS, LINKEDIN, MICROSOFT_ADS, REDDIT, TWITTER

            EXAMPLES:

            Remove one audience from FACEBOOK:
            remove_audiences_from_campaign({
                "campaign_id": 42545,
                "channel_audiences": {
                    "FACEBOOK": ["European Digital Nomad Investors_p2w8"]
                }
            })

            Remove audiences from multiple channels at once:
            remove_audiences_from_campaign({
                "campaign_id": 42545,
                "channel_audiences": {
                    "FACEBOOK": ["Audience A", "Audience B"],
                    "LINKEDIN": ["Audience C"]
                }
            })

            INTEGRATION WITH OTHER TOOLS:
            - Use get_campaign_by_wizard_id to inspect current audiences per channel before removing
            - Use search_campaigns_by_names to find the campaign ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
campaign_idYesThe unique identifier of the campaign
channel_audiencesYesMap of channel type to list of audience names to remove. Example: {"FACEBOOK": ["Audience A"], "LINKEDIN": ["Audience B"]}

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds rich behavioral detail: how removal works on both campaign structures (clearing WizNativeAdContainer(s), dropping containers with no assets, deleting groups on drafts), and the partial-failure behavior where removal_results must be checked. This goes well beyond the annotations and describes side effects clearly.

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 longer than average but well-structured with clear sections (WHEN TO USE, RESPONSE, REQUIRED PARAMETERS, EXAMPLES, INTEGRATION). The core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. Some redundancy exists (REQUIRED PARAMETERS repeats schema info), but each section serves a purpose for a complex tool with nested objects. It is organized and scannable.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (two campaign structures, nested parameter, partial failures) and the absence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains the response format (removal_results list with per-removal success/error), the behavior on both structures, prerequisites (finding campaign ID), and even includes examples. No critical information is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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 100% (both parameters documented), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value by explaining that 'Channel and audience IDs are resolved internally' and listing valid channel types (FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, etc.), plus providing examples that illustrate the channel_audiences object structure. This exceeds the schema's simple descriptions.

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 purpose: 'Remove specific audiences from one or more channels in an existing campaign.' It specifies the verb (remove), resource (audiences from channels in campaign), and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'remove_target_groups_from_campaign' by mentioning it as an alternative. The scope is precise and unambiguous.

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 explicit conditions: 'User wants to remove a specific audience from a channel' and 'User wants to clean up audiences from one or more channels.' It also names the alternative tool (remove_target_groups_from_campaign) and clarifies that multiple removals can be done in one call. The integration section advises using get_campaign_by_wizard_id to inspect before removal, giving clear context.

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.

Resources