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

Google Ads by Get MCP Ads

by get-mcp-ads
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

google ads run readonly rpc

google_ads_run_readonly_rpc
Read-onlyIdempotent

Run allowlisted read-only Google Ads RPC operations outside GAQL to retrieve audience, planning, benchmark, suggestion, invoice, and payment data without allowing mutations or uploads.

Instructions

Advanced read-only escape hatch for allowlisted Google Ads services outside GAQL: Audience Insights, Reach Planner, benchmarks, creator/trending insights, targeting suggestions, Smart Campaign suggestions, identity verification, invoices, and payments accounts. The operation is an enum; arbitrary paths and all mutations/uploads are impossible.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestNoOfficial REST JSON request body for POST operations, or query parameters for GET operations
operationYesExact allowlisted operation to execute. Arbitrary provider operations are not accepted.
customerIdNoRequired for customer-scoped operations; omit for global planning catalogs

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYesOriginal 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.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.1.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / request / propertyNames
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • 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"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already carry readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real value by disclosing that the operation is enum-constrained and that arbitrary paths, mutations, and uploads are structurally impossible. It does not mention rate limits, per-operation error modes, or permissions, so it is not a full behavioral picture.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the escape-hatch framing and then the safety constraint. No filler and no repetition of the annotation vocabulary.

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 no explanation, and the annotations plus 100% schema coverage carry safety and parameter meaning. What is missing is the mapping between the 30 enum operations and their required request bodies/customer scope, which is the main remaining ambiguity for a generic RPC dispatcher.

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 operation, request, and customerId are already documented in the schema. The description only echoes that operation is an enum; it adds no guidance on how request payload shape varies per operation or which enum members are GET vs POST, which would be the genuinely additive information.

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?

Names a specific verb (run) and resource (allowlisted Google Ads read-only RPCs) and explicitly scopes it as 'outside GAQL', which distinguishes it from the sibling google_ads_run_gaql. The parenthetical service list (Audience Insights, Reach Planner, benchmarks, invoices, payments) makes the covered surface concrete.

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?

'Escape hatch ... outside GAQL' clearly positions this as the fallback for operations the GAQL query tool cannot express, and 'all mutations/uploads are impossible' states a hard when-not boundary. It stops short of naming google_ads_run_gaql as the preferred path or saying what to do when an operation is not in the enum.

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