AdsAgent — Meta Ads MCP

fb_users_refresh_routing

Queue an ad-account routing refresh for one FB user

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fb_user_label`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	No
`retryable`	No
`support_ref`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 23, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / connection_context
```
Removed value: -{
-  "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
Changed6 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026
- addedOutput schema / else / then / properties / category
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / else / then / properties / expected
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / else / then / properties / failure_kind
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / else / then / properties / responsibility_hint
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / else / then / properties / route
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / else / then / properties / user_visible
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 13, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / connection_context
```
Added value: +{
+  "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedSep 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish non-readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the description only adds the important nuance that this 'queues' work asynchronously rather than applying the refresh immediately. It does not say what gets refreshed, whether prior routing is overwritten, or what permissions are needed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Its brevity is close to under-specification, but nothing in it is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an asynchronous queue operation with an optional target parameter, the description omits scope (which ad accounts are re-routed), the effect of omitting fb_user_label, and any link to the sibling refresh tools. The existence of an output schema excuses it from describing return values, but the operational gaps remain.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single parameter fb_user_label, so the description must compensate and largely doesn't: 'one FB user' only implies a single-user identifier, not whether it is a name, an ID, or a configured label. It also doesn't explain the surprising fact that the parameter is optional (0 required), i.e. what the default/targeted set is when omitted.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Queue an ad-account routing refresh' scoped to 'one FB user'. That is far clearer than a tautology, but it never distinguishes this from the nearby assets_refresh_ad_account / assets_refresh_all siblings, so the agent cannot tell which refresh tool applies from the description alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. account already linked), and no named alternative among the several refresh/label tools in the sibling list. The agent must infer when this is preferable to assets_refresh_ad_account.

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

All AdsAgent — Meta Ads MCP 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?