Meta Ads MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

ads_create_ad

Create an ad in an ad set using an existing creative ID. First build the creative with creatives_create_* tools, then pass its ID here to assemble the ad.

Instructions

Create an ad inside an ad set, referencing an existing ad creative.

Use creatives_create_* tools first to build the creative, then pass its ID here.

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": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "adset_id": "<adset_id>",
      "creative_id": "<creative_id>"
    },
    "name": "ads_create_ad"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	Yes
`status`	No	PAUSED
`confirm`	No
`adset_id`	Yes
`account_id`	Yes
`creative_id`	Yes
`tracking_specs`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It adds the prerequisite of an existing creative and implies a mutation, but does not mention status defaults, the confirm parameter, side effects, or permission requirements. This is limited but slightly helpful.

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 clear front-loading: the purpose is stated first, followed by the workflow. No wasted words.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description is insufficient. It clarifies the workflow but omits details about the status default, confirm behavior, return values, and tracking_specs format.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description only indirectly explains creative_id ('pass its ID here') and adset_id. The meaning of status, confirm, tracking_specs, and account_id is left to the agent, and parameter names are insufficient for ambiguous fields like confirm and tracking_specs.

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?

Description clearly states the tool creates an ad within an ad set, referencing an existing creative. The verb 'Create' and resource 'ad inside an ad set' are specific, and mentioning the creative reference distinguishes it from ads_create_campaign and ads_create_adset.

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?

It provides an explicit workflow: build a creative using creatives_create_* tools first, then pass its ID. This tells the agent when to use this tool (after creative creation) and distinguishes it from tools that create campaigns or ad sets.

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

Deploy Server