AdsAgent — Meta Ads MCP

operations_confirm_adset_status

DestructiveIdempotent

Run the change the user just confirmed in this conversation: set the reviewed status field of one Meta ad set from current to approved value. Requires approval_ref and expected_plan_digest

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "approval_ref": "<approval_ref>",
      "expected_plan_digest": "<expected_plan_digest>"
    },
    "name": "operations_confirm_adset_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`new_value`	No
`old_value`	No
`entity_name`	No
`approval_ref`	Yes
`expected_plan_digest`	Yes

Output Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / connection_context

Removed value: -{
-  "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / entity_name
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedInput schema / properties / new_value

Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "number",
+    "boolean",
+    "object",
+    "array"
+  ]
+}

addedInput schema / properties / old_value

Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "number",
+    "boolean",
+    "object",
+    "array",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / approval_ref / maxLength
```
Previous value: -25New value: +38
```
- changedInput schema / properties / approval_ref / pattern
```
Previous value: -"^appr_[0-9a-f]{20}$"New value: +"^(?:appr_[0-9a-f]{20}|batch_[0-9a-f]{32})$"
```
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"
+}
```
AddedOct 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the operation is bound to a specific confirmed plan via approval_ref and expected_plan_digest, which tells the agent the call will be rejected outside that approval flow. It stops short of describing failure behavior on digest mismatch.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with the action and its precondition front-loaded, then the required inputs. No filler; every clause carries information.

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

Completeness3/5

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 needn't be explained. However, for a destructive, approval-gated mutation with 0% parameter documentation, the description leaves the optional parameters and the prepare→confirm lifecycle underspecified, which is a real gap for correct invocation.

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% across 5 parameters, so the description must carry the load. It names only the two required parameters ('Requires approval_ref and expected_plan_digest') without explaining what they are or how they are obtained, and never mentions new_value, old_value, or entity_name at all.

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: apply a user-confirmed status change to one Meta ad set, moving the reviewed status field from its current value to approved. The singular 'one Meta ad set' implicitly separates it from plural siblings like operations_confirm_ad_statuses, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

'Run the change the user just confirmed in this conversation' clearly gates usage on a prior prepare step plus explicit user confirmation. It does not name the alternative to reach for when confirmation is missing (e.g., adsets_prepare_status_change), leaving that inference to the agent.

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?