Google Ads MCP Server

create_conversion_action

Create a new Google Ads conversion action to track specific user activities. Specify name, category, type, and optional counting and value settings for accurate conversion tracking.

Instructions

Create a new conversion action for tracking

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": {
      "customerId": "<customerId>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "category": "<category>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "create_conversion_action"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Name of the conversion action
`type`	Yes	Conversion type
`category`	Yes	Conversion category
`customerId`	Yes	Google Ads customer ID
`countingType`	No	How to count conversions
`defaultValue`	No	Default conversion value

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a write operation but does not mention required permissions, potential side effects, idempotency, or response format. Minimal detail is given beyond the action itself.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single concise sentence with no fluff, but it is under-specified. While brevity is positive, the lack of meaningful content makes it less useful than it could be.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, 3 enums) and absence of annotations or output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain what a conversion action is, when to create one, or what happens after creation.

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%, so the input schema fully documents all six parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, which is acceptable per the baseline but provides no extra value.

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 clearly states the action ('Create') and the resource ('a new conversion action'), with a purpose ('for tracking'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_conversion_action, though it could be more specific about what a conversion action entails.

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 such as update_conversion_action or import_offline_conversions. The description simply states what it does without contextualizing its usage.

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

Deploy Server