Microsoft Advertising MCP server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

bing get ad groups

bing_get_ad_groups

Read-onlyIdempotent

Access native ad group configuration and structure within owned campaigns on the Microsoft Advertising platform. Retrieve detailed data for specific Search or Shopping campaigns to review performance and settings.

Instructions

Read ad groups and their native configuration in an owned campaign.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "accountId": "<accountId>",
      "campaignId": "<campaignId>",
      "campaignType": "<campaignType>"
    },
    "name": "bing_get_ad_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`accountId`	Yes	Account ID listed in BING_ADS_ACCOUNT_IDS. Use the numeric ID, not the eight-character account number shown in the web app.
`campaignId`	Yes	Numeric campaign ID in the selected account.
`campaignType`	Yes	Native type of campaignId, used to verify that it belongs to the account. Dynamic Search campaigns use Search with DynamicSearchAdsSetting.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	Original tool result: parsed JSON when the text is JSON, otherwise the text or multiple MCP content blocks. Provider fields depend on the selected query.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1Oct 26, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / result / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "properties": {},
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "items": {},
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": {},
+    "properties": {},
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {},
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedv1.0.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'owned campaign' scoping nuance; it says nothing about pagination, result caps, or what happens when campaignType does not match the campaign.

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 the resource and scope stated up front and zero redundant or filler text. Nothing could be removed without losing 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?

With an output schema present, a fully described 3-parameter schema, and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description supplies enough to select and call the tool correctly. The only looseness is the undefined term 'native configuration', which the output schema presumably resolves.

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 three required parameters (accountId, campaignId, campaignType) are already documented in the schema, including the enum semantics. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline case of 3.

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 (Read) and resource (ad groups) scoped to an owned campaign, which separates it from siblings like bing_get_ads or bing_get_campaigns by resource type. It does not explicitly name or contrast an alternative sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

The phrase 'in an owned campaign' implies the caller must already have a campaign in an owned account, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternate tool routing. An agent must infer from the sibling list which getter to pick.

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