Confirm the approved plan to replace the Facebook Page identity on one existing Meta ad. Requires approval_ref and expected_plan_digest
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| approval_ref | Yes | ||
| connection_context | No | ||
| expected_plan_digest | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | No | ||
| retryable | No | ||
| support_ref | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / approval_ref / maxLengthPrevious value: -25New value: +38Input schema / properties / approval_ref / patternPrevious value: -"^appr_[0-9a-f]{20}$"New value: +"^(?:appr_[0-9a-f]{20}|batch_[0-9a-f]{32})$"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?
Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that the replacement affects the Facebook Page identity on one existing Meta ad and requires an approved plan reference plus digest.
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 two short sentences, front-loads the operation, and includes the required dependency immediately after. There is no wasted or redundant wording.
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, so return values need not be described, and the annotations already cover destructive and open-world behavior. The description is nearly complete for a narrow confirm operation, though it could mention the optional connection_context or make the prepare-step sequencing more explicit.
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 parameter meaning, but it only names the two required parameters without explaining their format, source, or role. It also omits the optional connection_context parameter, so it only partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.
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 (Confirm), resource (approved plan to replace the Facebook Page identity), and scope (one existing Meta ad). It distinguishes the operation from creative/copy/url replacement siblings, though it does not address possible overlap with the similarly named ads_replace_page_confirm sibling.
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?
It clearly indicates the tool is used to confirm an already-approved plan, and it names the required approval_ref and expected_plan_digest. It does not provide explicit when-not guidance or name alternative siblings such as ads_replace_page_deny or ads_replace_page_prepare.
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.