Google Ads MCP Server

Create Responsive Search Ad

create_responsive_search_ad

Creates a paused responsive search ad in Google Ads, so you can review headlines, descriptions, and final URL before enabling it.

Instructions

Creates a responsive search ad in PAUSED state (enable it with set_ad_status after review).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path1`	No	Optional first display-URL path segment (max 15 chars).
`path2`	No	Optional second display-URL path segment (max 15 chars, requires path1).
`final_url`	Yes	The landing page URL.
`headlines`	Yes	3 to 15 headlines, each at most 30 characters.
`ad_group_id`	Yes	The numeric id of the ad group to place the ad in.
`customer_id`	Yes	The Google Ads account.
`descriptions`	Yes	2 to 4 descriptions, each at most 90 characters.
`validate_only`	No	If True, only validates the request.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.2Oct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=false, so they say little. The description supplies the genuinely useful behavioral fact that the ad is created PAUSED and must be enabled with set_ad_status, which an agent could not infer otherwise. It stops short of covering permissions, validation failures, or duplicate handling.

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?

One compact sentence; the creation act and the paused-state caveat are front-loaded with zero filler, and the follow-up tool is named in parentheses.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the schema covers all 8 parameters. For a mutation tool with thin annotations, the description covers the essential state behavior but leaves error/permission context unstated.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, with headline/description counts, character limits, and path constraints all documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Creates a responsive search ad') and adds the non-obvious initial state (PAUSED). It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling creation tools like create_ad_group, though the resource is distinct enough to disambiguate.

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 a clear lifecycle instruction: the ad lands paused and is enabled later via set_ad_status, implying a review step. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative creation path is offered, but the follow-up routing is actionable.

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