Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-openai-ads

mcp-openai-ads

by dienhokhanh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List ad groups

list_ad_groups
Read-only

Retrieve ad groups, optionally for one campaign, with bid strategy, max bid and context hints.

Instructions

List ad groups, optionally for one campaign, with bid strategy, max bid and context hints.

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": "list_ad_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
afterNoCursor: return results after this id (use last_id from the previous page).
limitNoPage size (default 20, max 500).
orderNo
campaign_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds what fields surface (bid strategy, max bid, context hints) but says nothing about pagination behavior despite the cursor/limit params.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

One front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the trailing "context hints" phrasing is vague for the space it consumes.

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?

With no output schema, the description does carry the return-field burden and names three returned attributes, which helps. However, for a 5-param paginated list with 40% schema coverage, the missing filter and ordering semantics leave it only minimally complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 40% across 5 params: name, order, and campaign_id are undocumented in the schema, and the description only alludes to the campaign filter ("optionally for one campaign"). It does not compensate for the coverage gap, nor explain allowed name matching or order 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?

States a specific verb+resource ("List ad groups") with scope ("optionally for one campaign") and the fields returned. It is distinguishable from singular get_ad_group, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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?

"optionally for one campaign" implies the campaign_id filter is the scoping switch, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives like list_campaigns or get_ad_group. Usage is only implied.

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