LinkedIn Ads MCP Server

upload_image

Upload images to LinkedIn media library from local files or Google Drive links for use in ad creatives.

Instructions

Upload an image to the LinkedIn media library from a local file or Google Drive link.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "upload_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`filePath`	No	Local file path to the image
`googleDriveUrl`	No	Google Drive shareable link (file must be publicly accessible or service account has access)
`fileName`	No	File name for the asset	upload.png

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral details such as whether the upload is idempotent, permissions required, file size limits, or what happens on duplicate names. It only states the basic action, leaving many behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action and sources. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the lack of output schema, the description could mention return values (e.g., media ID) or additional constraints like file types and size limits. It is adequate for basic understanding but incomplete for nuanced usage.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minor value by clarifying that the Google Drive link must be publicly accessible or service account accessible, but it does not elaborate on file formats or other constraints beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action (upload), target (LinkedIn media library), and sources (local file or Google Drive link). It distinguishes from the sibling 'upload_video' by specifying images, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description indicates that the tool accepts two types of sources, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'upload_video' or when not to use it. It lacks conditional statements or context about prerequisites.

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