Skip to main content
Glama

AdsAgent — TikTok Ads MCP

List and refresh advertiser apps

assets_list_apps
Destructive

List cached TikTok app assets (App Promotion advertised apps) for the authenticated tenant. Each row carries linked_bcs: [{bc_id, bc_name}, ...] derived from linked_advertiser_ids → advertiser.owner_bc_id.

Returns a compact bounded page. Optional: cursor from the previous response, limit (default 20, maximum 50), and search (case-insensitive native id/name lookup). Keep the same tool, filters and limit while following next_cursor serially until complete=true. A rejected or old cursor requires restarting page one. complete describes pagination, not upstream sync coverage or permission to create.

For creation, pass advertiser_id from assets_list_ad_accounts to return only assets with an exact cached advertiser link. Shared BC ownership alone is not an advertiser link. The prepare step still verifies the selected asset, identity type and create-capable authorization.

Assets are not swept on a schedule. With advertiser_id, an empty cached result is checked live against TikTok once for that advertiser; pass refresh=true (first page, advertiser_id required) to re-read it even when cached rows exist. coverage.live_refresh reports refreshed, rate_limited, no_permission (TikTok refuses this advertiser; do not create on it), no_connection or failed.

REQUIRED: none. EXAMPLE: assets_list_apps({"search": "package"})

A live refresh can replace cached app rows for the selected advertiser.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNo
searchNo
refreshNo
advertiser_idNo
connection_contextNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / connection_context
      Added value: +{
      +  "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / refresh
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": false,
      +  "title": "Refresh",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite annotations already flagging destructiveHint=true, the description explains the actual destructive mechanism ('A live refresh can replace cached app rows for the selected advertiser') and enumerates the refresh outcome set (refreshed, rate_limited, no_permission, no_connection, failed). It also surfaces auth constraints ('create-capable authorization', 'do not create on it') and rate-limit signaling beyond what the annotations provide.

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?

Dense but front-loaded with purpose and return shape first, then parameters, then refresh semantics. It is long for a list tool and the note that a live refresh can replace cached rows slightly restates the earlier refresh guidance, but nearly every sentence carries operational meaning.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description supplies the return contract itself: bounded page, linked_bcs rows derived from linked_advertiser_ids → advertiser.owner_bc_id, next_cursor/complete pagination semantics, and coverage.live_refresh statuses. Combined with the refresh/cursor rules, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and safely.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description carries the full burden and does so: limit (default 20, maximum 50), cursor (from previous response), search (case-insensitive native id/name lookup), refresh (first page, advertiser_id required), and advertiser_id (exact cached advertiser link, not shared BC ownership). Only connection_context (an internal token) is left undocumented, which is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('List cached TikTok app assets (App Promotion advertised apps) for the authenticated tenant') and even names the sibling asset type it relates to ('advertiser_id from assets_list_ad_accounts'). An agent can distinguish it from the other assets_list_* tools without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when/when-not conditions: use advertiser_id from assets_list_ad_accounts for creation, pass refresh=true only on the first page with advertiser_id, follow next_cursor serially with same filters/limit, and restart from page one on a rejected/old cursor. It also steers the agent away from creating when coverage.live_refresh reports no_permission.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources