Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Ads MCP for Snapchat

Ads MCP for Snapchat

by Usame794
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

snap_clone_ad

Clone an existing ad's creative into multiple ad squads as paused ads, skipping squads that already have it; preview changes first and apply with an approval token.

Instructions

Clone an existing ad (same creative) into other ad squads. New ads are created PAUSED. Skips squads that already have an ad with that creative. Previews unless confirm=true. Two steps: confirm=false returns a preview and an approval_token; to apply, repeat the same arguments with confirm=true and that approval_token.

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_id": "<ad_id>",
      "target_adsquad_ids": "<target_adsquad_ids>"
    },
    "name": "snap_clone_ad"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ad_idYes
confirmNofalse = preview only (nothing sent). true = apply; needs approval_token from the preview.
new_nameNoName for the new ads; defaults to the source ad name
approval_tokenNoThe approval_token returned by the preview of this exact request. Required with confirm=true.
target_adsquad_idsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.9.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, the description still adds meaningful behavior: new ads are created PAUSED, squads already containing the creative are skipped, and the call previews by default. The two-step approval_token flow is genuinely useful context beyond the structured fields. However, it omits what the preview response contains besides the token and any failure/partial-success behavior, so it does not fully exploit the space annotations leave open.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the pause/skip behaviors, then the preview/confirm contract. Every sentence carries information an agent needs and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the mutation's side effects (PAUSED state), deduplication behavior, and the two-step approval contract. What remains thin is the preview payload and error/partial-failure handling, which an agent would want before committing with confirm=true.

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 60%; the description explains confirm's preview-vs-apply semantics and the full approval_token round-trip (repeat the same arguments with confirm=true), which is the hardest part of the schema to infer. ad_id and target_adsquad_ids are clear from their schema definitions. new_name's defaulting behavior is left to the schema description, which covers it.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Clone an existing ad (same creative) into other ad squads.' The parenthetical '(same creative)' signals the scope boundary against copy/creative-level operations without naming a sibling. An agent knows exactly what is being duplicated and where it lands, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

It states the operating context clearly: use this for duplicating an ad across ad squads, it skips squads that already hold that creative, and it previews unless confirm=true. That gives the agent the when and the safety precondition. It stops short of directing the agent to an alternative tool (e.g. snap_clone_creative or snap_create_ad) when cloning across campaigns or creating fresh ads.

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