LinkedIn Ads MCP Server

linkedin health check

linkedin_health_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify LinkedIn Ads access by checking token validity, reachable ad accounts, and the reporting endpoint without exposing credentials. Use it to diagnose connection issues before fetching campaign data.

Instructions

Read-only LinkedIn Ads health check. Confirms the token works, lists which configured ad accounts it can reach, checks the reporting endpoint and reports the API version header in use, without ever returning the token itself.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`adAccountId`	No	Optional configured account to probe for reporting access. Defaults to the first reachable one.

Output Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1Oct 26, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

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

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, but the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it enumerates the individual probes it performs and states the security guarantee that the token is never returned. It does not say what a failure looks like (error vs. a report with a failing field), which is the one relevant behavioral gap for a health check.

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 establishes read-only scope first, then lists the checks. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 shape needn't be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile; the description supplies the substantive content — what is probed and the token-non-disclosure guarantee. Only the failure/partial-success semantics are left unstated, a modest gap for a diagnostic tool.

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% and the single optional adAccountId is fully documented in the schema, including its default behavior. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — a read-only LinkedIn Ads health check — and enumerates exactly what it verifies: token validity, reachable ad accounts, the reporting endpoint, and the API version header. That is clearly distinguishable from the data-retrieval siblings (get_campaigns, get_insights, list_ad_accounts) without opening any schema.

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 framing as a health/diagnostic check gives a clear context for when to call it: verifying credentials and connectivity before running reports. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, even though linkedin_list_ad_accounts overlaps on the account-listing behavior.

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

Deploy Server