Tencent Ad MCP Server

leads_list_get

Get leads list for a Tencent Ads account within a specified time range, with options to filter, paginate, and select fields.

Instructions

获取线索列表 (Get leads list)

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>",
      "time_range": "<time_range>"
    },
    "name": "leads_list_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No
`fields`	No
`filtering`	No
`page_size`	No
`account_id`	Yes	广告主账户ID
`time_range`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

D1.3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description offers no behavioral details—e.g., whether the operation is read-only, pagination behavior, required permissions, or response format. The agent is left entirely in the dark.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely short—but this is under-specification, not conciseness. The description is just a name repetition and does not earn its place as a separate content block.

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

Completeness1/5

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

The tool has 6 parameters with nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides no context about expected behavior, return values, or how to effectively use the tool. Completely inadequate.

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

Parameters1/5

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

With only 17% schema coverage, the description should compensate but adds nothing. It does not explain the meaning, constraints, or usage of any parameter, including required ones like account_id and time_range.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is a tautology: '获取线索列表 (Get leads list)' essentially restates the tool name. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like leads_add, leads_update, or 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 Guidelines1/5

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

No usage context is provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives, such as other leads-related tools or tools for different resources.

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