Skip to main content
Glama
Pavelsiba

yandex-direct-mcp-plus

by Pavelsiba
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Управление общими минус-фразами

manage_negative_keyword_shared_sets
Destructive

Create, update, or delete shared negative keyword sets for an account to manage negative keywords across Yandex.Direct campaigns.

Instructions

Создать, изменить или удалить общие наборы минус-фраз аккаунта.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesЧто сделать с наборами: add, update или delete (необратимо)
dry_runNotrue — ничего не менять: проверить параметры и вернуть тела запросов, которые ушли бы в Директ. Чтение при этом выполняется.
set_idsNoНаборы для удаления; обязателен при action=delete
add_setsNoНаборы для создания; обязателен при action=add
update_setsNoНаборы для изменения; обязателен при action=update

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.7.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "true — ничего не менять: проверить параметры и вернуть тела запросов, которые ушли бы в Директ. Чтение при этом выполняется.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv1.6.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds nothing beyond them — it does not mention that delete is irreversible, what dry_run does, or any account/permission implications. Useful behavioral detail (dry_run semantics, irreversibility) lives only in the schema descriptions, not the prose.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, stating the resource and the three supported operations. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a destructive multi-action tool.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 5-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, one sentence is thin: it omits the conditional required parameters (set_ids for delete, add_sets for add, update_sets for update) and the dry_run safety valve. The rich schema and annotations partially compensate, leaving it adequate but incomplete.

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%: action, dry_run, set_ids, add_sets and update_sets are each documented in the schema, including conditional requirements. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, 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?

The description names a specific verb triple (создать/изменить/удалить) and a specific resource (общие наборы минус-фраз аккаунта), which the agent can distinguish from sibling list_negative_keyword_shared_sets (read-only) and link_negative_keyword_sets (linking). It does not, however, explicitly reference any sibling tool to sharpen the boundary.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description states no conditions for when to use shared sets versus the campaign- or ad-group-level negative keyword tools (set_campaign_negative_keywords, set_ad_group_negative_keywords). The only routing signal is the action enum buried in the schema, so the agent gets no explicit when-to-use guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools