Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

flayr

by social.flayr
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ads readiness

ads_readiness
Read-onlyIdempotent

[read-only] Whether each connected network and ad account can run ads, and what to fix first. Pass objective (the campaign objective, e.g. lead_generation for an Instant Form campaign) before activating: each check then says whether it blocks that objective or is advisory, and overall counts only the blocking ones. A blocking check in state manual is not readable by API: confirm it on the platform. (Wraps GET /api/v2/ads/readiness.)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ads_readiness"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
brandIdNoA brand id (GET /api/v2/brands) or "personal"; default: the key owner's active brand. A brand-bound key is always pinned to its brand; any other value is 403.
refreshNoRequest fresh network reads. Reuses results younger than 30 seconds to protect the platform; inspect checkedAt.
objectiveNoThe campaign objective to check readiness for. Omit for the every-objective verdict, where the pixel, domain and business verification all block.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / refresh
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request fresh network reads. Reuses results younger than 30 seconds to protect the platform; inspect checkedAt.",
+  "enum": [
+    "1"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / objective
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The campaign objective to check readiness for. Omit for the every-objective verdict, where the pixel, domain and business verification all block.",
+  "enum": [
+    "engagement",
+    "traffic",
+    "awareness",
+    "video_views",
+    "lead_generation",
+    "lead_conversion",
+    "conversions",
+    "app_promotion",
+    "catalog_sales",
+    "job_applicants"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses the 30-second result cache and the reason for it, the brand-pin 403 constraint, and the caveat that blocking checks in `manual` state must be confirmed on the platform. That is exactly the operational context annotations cannot express.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then the objective-parameter effect, then the error caveat, with the underlying endpoint noted last. No filler and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description still conveys the return shape (per-check states, `blocks` vs `advisory`, an `overall` tally) well enough to interpret results. A sentence on what a fully ready vs blocked response looks like would close the remaining 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds real meaning: the objective changes how each check is classified (`blocks` vs `advisory`) and how `overall` is counted. It also notes a `manual` blocking check is not API-readable, telling the agent what an unreadable result means.

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?

The description states a specific diagnostic capability: whether each connected network and ad account can run ads, plus 'what to fix first'. That is more than a restatement of the title and lets an agent see this is a pre-flight readiness check rather than a campaign mutation. It does not explicitly contrast itself with a nearby diagnostic such as ads_launch_review, so it falls short of 5.

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?

'Pass `objective` ... before activating' gives a concrete usage point, and 'Omit for the every-objective verdict' clarifies the default path. What is missing is an explicit statement of when not to use it or which sibling to use once readiness passes (e.g. campaign creation or launch review).

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

All flayr toolsInspect
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