flin-gmp-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_cm360_creatives

Read-onlyIdempotent

List Campaign Manager 360 creatives with names, types, sizes, and asset metadata, filtering by advertiser, campaign, IDs, creative type, status, or search terms.

Instructions

List CM360 creatives with names, types, sizes and creativeAssets (one page, max 1000).

Filter by advertiser/campaign, IDs, native creative types or name/ID search (* allowed). Omit active/archived to include both states. Preserve filters for nextPageToken. HTML5 backup assets have role BACKUP_IMAGE; assetIdentifier.name is a filename, not a downloadable URL. This returns metadata, not image bytes or rendered HTML5.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`types`	No
`active`	No
`search`	No
`account`	No
`archived`	No
`page_size`	No
`page_token`	No
`profile_id`	Yes
`campaign_id`	No
`creative_ids`	No
`advertiser_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses pagination behavior, the one-page max of 1000, the need to preserve filters for nextPageToken, and the fact that results are metadata rather than image bytes or rendered HTML5. It also explains a subtle HTML5 backup asset detail.

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 front-loaded and dense: purpose and scope first, then filtering and pagination rules, then important asset caveats. Every sentence carries useful information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be fully explained, and the description adds useful return-shape caveats. However, with 11 parameters and no schema descriptions, a few parameters remain under-explained.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage across 11 parameters, the description compensates well by explaining the main filters, wildcard search, active/archived omission, and pagination preservation. It still leaves profile_id, account, page_size, and page_token mechanics largely implicit.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List CM360 creatives') and names the key returned fields. It clearly distinguishes this list operation from the sibling get_cm360_creative.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear usage context: filters for advertiser/campaign, IDs, types, and search, plus the rule to omit active/archived to include both states. It does not explicitly name get_cm360_creative as the alternative for fetching a single creative.

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