assets_refresh_ad_account
Refresh one account and its connection Page cache
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page_id | No | ||
| ad_account_id | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | No | ||
| retryable | No | ||
| support_ref | No |
Refresh one account and its connection Page cache
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page_id | No | ||
| ad_account_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | No | ||
| retryable | No | ||
| support_ref | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / connection_contextRemoved value: -{
- "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / else / then / properties / categoryAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / else / then / properties / expectedAdded value: +{
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / else / then / properties / failure_kindAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / else / then / properties / responsibility_hintAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / else / then / properties / routeAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / else / then / properties / user_visibleAdded value: +{
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Input schema / properties / connection_contextAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare that this is not read-only, not destructive, and not open-world, so the safety profile is mostly covered structurally. The description adds useful scope by saying it refreshes one account and its connection Page cache, but it does not explain side effects, permissions, or whether the refresh is immediate or queued.
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?
The description is a single compact sentence with no filler and the action and scope are front-loaded. It is concise, though its brevity contributes to gaps covered under other dimensions.
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?
An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so return values and mutation risk need not be explained. However, with 0% schema description coverage and a close sibling like assets_refresh_all, the description is missing enough selection guidance and parameter semantics to be fully complete.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden of parameter meaning. It vaguely refers to 'one account' and 'Page cache', which loosely maps to ad_account_id and page_id, but it does not explain formats, required versus optional behavior, or what page_id controls.
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 states a specific verb, 'Refresh', and a clear resource scope: one account plus its connection Page cache. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the bulk sibling assets_refresh_all through the word 'one', but it does not explicitly name or route against that alternative.
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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus assets_refresh_all, assets_list_ad_accounts, or other refresh tools. It implies a single-account refresh scope but does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or selection criteria.
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.