Skip to main content
Glama
askads

Yandex Direct MCP

by askads
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Действие с кампаниями

campaign_action
Destructive

Suspend, resume, archive, unarchive, or delete Yandex Direct campaigns by ID to control campaign status and remove outdated campaigns.

Instructions

Выполняет действие над кампаниями по id: suspend, resume, archive, unarchive или delete.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYesId кампаний, к которым применить действие.
actionYes
client_loginNoЛогин клиента агентства или кабинета в управлении (из list_clients). Если не указан — YANDEX_DIRECT_LOGIN из конфигурации, а без него собственный аккаунт токена.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / client_login
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Логин клиента агентства или кабинета в управлении (из list_clients). Если не указан — YANDEX_DIRECT_LOGIN из конфигурации, а без него собственный аккаунт токена.",
+  "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9._@-]{0,99}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / ids / description
      Previous value: -"Campaign ids to act on."New value: +"Id кампаний, к которым применить действие."
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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, so the safety profile is fully carried by structured fields. The description adds no behavioral context beyond them: it does not say that delete is irreversible while suspend/resume are reversible, whether partial failures are possible across the id list, or what permissions/client scope are needed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the verb, the target, and the complete action vocabulary with zero filler. Nothing is wasted and the key enumeration is not buried.

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?

This is a destructive batch mutation with no output schema, and the description never addresses the return shape (per-id success/failure, partial completion) or irreversibility. Given the tool's blast radius across multiple campaign ids, more operational guidance is expected.

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 a moderate 67% and both the action enum and client_login fallback behavior (YANDEX_DIRECT_LOGIN / token's own account) are already documented in the schema. The description only restates that ids target campaigns, adding no format, ordering, or batching semantics.

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 ('Выполняет действие') and resource ('над кампаниями по id') and enumerates the exact action set (suspend, resume, archive, unarchive, delete), so an agent knows precisely what this does. It stops short of differentiating from close siblings such as update_campaign or ad_action, which would be needed for a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the enumerated action list rather than stated: there are no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing sentences (e.g. use update_campaign to change settings instead of this). An agent can infer the batch-state-change role but must guess relative to siblings.

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