shopify-chatgpt-ads-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Set ad group bidding

set_bid

Adjust an ad group's bidding strategy and max bid; lowering a fixed bid applies at once, while bid increases or strategy changes return a plan for explicit confirmation.

Instructions

Change how an ad group bids. Lowering a fixed bid applies at once. Raising a bid or switching strategy can spend more: without confirm it returns a plan; show it, get an explicit yes, then call again with confirm: true and the plan_id. Maximize strategies need a daily campaign budget and take no max_bid. Fixed bids (Max CPC) retire for existing campaigns on 2027-01-01 per OpenAI.

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": {
      "ad_group_id": "<ad_group_id>",
      "strategy": "<strategy>"
    },
    "name": "set_bid"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No
`max_bid`	No	Max bid for fixed_bid, in major units of the ad account currency, e.g. "50" or "12.50"
`plan_id`	No
`strategy`	Yes
`ad_group_id`	Yes	Ad group id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true; the description goes well beyond that by disclosing the asymmetric commit behavior (immediate on decrease, two-step plan_id confirmation on increase), the spend risk of raising a bid, and the cross-tool prerequisite of a daily campaign budget for maximize strategies. No contradiction with annotations: a spend increase is a cost side effect, not a destructive one.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the confirmation workflow, then constraints. Every sentence carries operational weight. The closing deprecation notice is relevant but its attribution 'per OpenAI' is incongruous for an ad-group bidding tool and reads as noise or an unverifiable claim.

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?

For a 5-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the risky paths: the returned plan, the need to surface it and get an explicit yes, and the exact re-call shape with confirm and plan_id. It does not say what the plan contains or what happens if confirm is sent with a stale or missing plan_id.

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 only 40%, so the description must compensate and largely does: it explains confirm and plan_id as a paired approval mechanism and states that max_bid is invalid for maximize strategies. It leaves strategy choice semantics (clicks vs conversions) and plan_id lifetime/validity unstated.

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: 'Change how an ad group bids.' The scope (ad group bidding, not campaign budget) is clear enough that an agent can separate it from set_budget without opening the schema. It does not explicitly name the sibling alternative, which keeps it from a 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?

Gives concrete conditional guidance: lowering a fixed bid applies immediately, raising or switching strategy requires a confirm round-trip, and maximize strategies need a daily campaign budget and take no max_bid. These are real when/when-not rules. It stops short of naming set_budget as the alternative for budget changes.

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

Deploy Server