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

reddit-ads-mcp

by filippofinke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List pixels

reddit_ads_list_pixels
Read-only

Retrieve and review all Reddit ad pixels for a specified ad account, with pagination support to fetch multiple pages of results in one call.

Instructions

List Reddit pixels of an ad account.

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": "reddit_ads_list_pixels"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_pagesNoFollow pagination.next_url up to this many pages and merge results (default 1)
page_sizeNoItems per page (usually max 1000)
page_tokenNoPage token from a previous pagination.next_url
ad_account_idNoAd account ID (t2_... or a2_...). Defaults to REDDIT_ADS_ACCOUNT_ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
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 safety profile is covered. The description adds only the account scoping context and says nothing about pagination behavior, result limits, or ordering beyond what the schema already documents.

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 with zero waste. Nothing is padded or redundant for a simple read-only listing tool.

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?

For a read-only list tool with full schema coverage and existing annotations, the description is minimally sufficient. It omits sibling differentiation from list_business_pixels and gives no indication of what a pixel record contains, which is the main gap given there is no output schema.

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 all four parameters (max_pages, page_size, page_token, ad_account_id) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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 clear verb+resource with scope ('List Reddit pixels of an ad account'), which is specific and actionable. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling reddit_ads_list_business_pixels, which is a near-identical listing tool at a different scope, leaving the agent to infer the difference.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the natural alternative reddit_ads_list_business_pixels. The agent gets no routing signal for choosing between account-level and business-level pixel listings.

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