AdsAgent — Meta Ads MCP

setup_readiness_check

Read-only

Read minimal launch readiness

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

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

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that – "minimal" hints at a lightweight/summary read but never states scope, cost, or prerequisites, so credit for added context is minimal.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is a single short phrase with no padding, which is front-loaded, but the brevity crosses into under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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?

Output schema and annotations are rich, so return values and safety need not be described. However, in a large setup_* family the description does not tell the agent what "readiness" means or why to pick this over setup_get_status, leaving a real selection gap.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter semantics to explain and the schema is fully self-sufficient.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The phrase "Read minimal launch readiness" largely restates the tool name "Setup Readiness Check" without adding a concrete verb+resource pairing an agent can act on. "Minimal" is unexplained and does not clarify what is actually checked or how it differs from siblings like setup_get_status or setup_analyze_products.

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?

No guidance is given on when to call this versus the many adjacent sibling tools (setup_get_status, setup_analyze_products, setup_get_settings). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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?