Google Ads by Get MCP Ads

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

google ads get pmax assets

google_ads_get_pmax_assets

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get Performance Max asset group assets with campaign and asset group context, plus optional date-range performance metrics to audit and optimize creative effectiveness.

Instructions

List Performance Max asset group assets from asset_group_asset with asset group/campaign context and optional date-range performance metrics.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`daily`	No	Segment dated performance by segments.date.
`limit`	No	Maximum number of returned items or rows. The declared bounds and default apply; use pagination for additional results.
`assetId`	No	Restrict reporting to one asset.
`endDate`	No	Optional end date YYYY-MM-DD for performance metrics
`metrics`	No	Additional asset-compatible GAQL metric fields. Used with a date range; delivery metrics are always included. Omit for the default delivery/conversion fields.
`fieldType`	No	Optional AssetFieldType enum filter, e.g. HEADLINE, LONG_HEADLINE, MARKETING_IMAGE
`startDate`	No	Optional start date YYYY-MM-DD for performance metrics
`campaignId`	No	Optional Performance Max campaign ID filter
`customerId`	Yes	Google Ads customer ID (without dashes, e.g., 1234567890)
`assetGroupId`	No	Optional asset group ID filter
`statusFilter`	No	Native status values used to filter the returned entities.
`assetGroupIds`	No	Restrict reporting to these asset groups.

Output Schema

TableJSON 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.

First observedv2.0.1Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the source table and optional metrics, but does not disclose default field behavior, pagination, or response characteristics beyond what the schema and annotations provide.

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 that efficiently conveys the resource, source table, context, and optional metrics. Every phrase earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool has 12 parameters, but the schema is rich and fully describes every parameter, an output schema exists, and annotations cover the behavioral safety profile. The description provides enough high-level context to invoke the tool correctly; only explicit sibling differentiation is missing.

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 the schema fully documents all 12 parameters. The description adds a high-level framing of asset group/campaign context and metrics, but does not need to compensate for missing parameter documentation. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 Performance Max asset group assets' from the asset_group_asset table. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pmax_placements or pmax_asset_diagnostics, which target different resources.

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?

The description gives clear context about what the tool covers: PMax asset group assets with campaign/asset-group context and optional date-range performance metrics. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is stated clearly enough for an agent to infer when it applies.

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

Deploy Server