Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

analyticsadmin.properties.googleAdsLinks.list

Lists the Google Ads links attached to an Analytics property, returning paginated JSON results so you can audit or inspect linked accounts.

Instructions

Lists GoogleAdsLinks on a property [HTTP GET]. Returns the requested resource as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, delete, patch.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
parentYes[URL path segment] Required. Example format: properties/1234
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
pageSizeNo[query parameter] Optional. The maximum number of resources to return. If unspecified, at most 50 resources will be returned. The maximum value is 200 (higher values will be coer
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters.
pageTokenNo[query parameter] Optional. A page token, received from a previous `ListGoogleAdsLinks` call. Provide this to retrieve the subsequent page. When paginating, all other parameters

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nextPageTokenNo
googleAdsLinksNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / pageSize / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The maximum number of resources to return. If unspecified, at most 50 resources will be returned. The maximum value is 200 (higher values will be coer"New value: +"[query parameter] Optional. The maximum number of resources to return. If unspecified, at most 50 resources will be returned. The maximum value is 200 (higher values will be coer"
    • addedInput schema / properties / pageSize / format
      Added value: +"int32"
    • changedInput schema / properties / pageToken / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. A page token, received from a previous `ListGoogleAdsLinks` call. Provide this to retrieve the subsequent page. When paginating, all other parameters "New value: +"[query parameter] Optional. A page token, received from a previous `ListGoogleAdsLinks` call. Provide this to retrieve the subsequent page. When paginating, all other parameters "
    • changedInput schema / properties / parent / description
      Previous value: -"Required. Example format: properties/1234"New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. Example format: properties/1234"
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent / pattern
      Added value: +"^properties/[^/]+$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "googleAdsLinks": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "adsPersonalizationEnabled": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "canManageClients": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "createTime": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "creatorEmailAddress": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "customerId": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "updateTime": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "nextPageToken": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it does disclose the HTTP GET nature (signalling read-only) and that the resource is returned as JSON. However, it spends its behavioral budget on body_file/params-map mechanics that cannot apply to a GET, and says nothing about pagination limits (only the schema does) or permission requirements.

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?

Purpose is correctly front-loaded in the first clause, but the second clause is a generic template about request bodies that does not earn its place on a GET/list tool and may actively mislead an agent into thinking a body is expected.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With full schema coverage, an output schema, and an explicit HTTP GET signal, an agent has enough to call this correctly. Only auth/permission expectations and pagination caveats are absent, which are minor given the schema documents pageSize and pageToken.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a genuinely useful precedence rule not stated in the schema: typed parameters win over the `params` map, and `body_file` can supersede both. That is real semantic value even though the body_file clause is moot for a list call.

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?

States a specific verb (Lists), resource (GoogleAdsLinks) and scope (on a property), and names the sibling operations (create, delete, patch) over the same resource. The purpose is unmistakable, though the trailing sentence about request-body construction is irrelevant noise for a GET/list.

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?

Mentions siblings over the same resource, which implicitly frames this as the enumeration variant, but never states when to use it versus them (e.g., 'use to enumerate links before patching or deleting one'). No prerequisites or exclusions beyond an implied read-only listing.

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