Tencent Ad MCP Server

leads_add

Add a new lead to a Tencent Ads account by providing the account ID, lead name, and optionally a phone number.

Instructions

创建线索 (Create lead)

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>",
      "lead_name": "<lead_name>"
    },
    "name": "leads_add"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lead_name`	Yes	线索名称
`account_id`	Yes	广告主账户ID
`lead_phone`	No	线索电话

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it only states 'Create lead' without mentioning side effects, idempotency, authentication requirements, or potential errors. This is insufficient for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the tool's primary function.

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 creation tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description lacks important context such as return values, error handling, or side effects. Additional details would help the agent use the tool effectively.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions in Chinese (e.g., '线索名称' for lead_name). The tool description adds no extra semantic information beyond the schema. Given high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description explicitly states 'Create lead' in both Chinese and English, clearly indicating the action (create) and the resource (lead). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like leads_list_get, leads_update, and leads_claim_update.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where leads_add is appropriate. Sibling tools handle different operations on leads, but the description offers no differentiation.

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