Meta Ads by Get MCP Ads

meta get audience details

meta_get_audience_details

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch detailed custom, saved, and lookalike audiences for a Meta ad account, with pagination, rich fields, and batch lookup by audience IDs where permissions allow.

Instructions

Read detailed custom, saved, and lookalike audiences with pagination and rich fields where permissions allow.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`type`	No	Provider object or operation type selected from this schema's allowed values.	all
`limit`	No	Maximum number of returned items or rows. The declared bounds and default apply; use pagination for additional results.
`cursor`	No	Pagination cursor from previous response
`adAccountId`	No	Ad account ID used when listing audiences.
`audienceIds`	No	Specific audience IDs to fetch via batch IDs lookup.

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.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.1Oct 30, 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 observedv2.0.1Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only two behavioral facts beyond that: results are paginated and fields are permission-gated. It says nothing about result volume, permission failure behavior, or whether an ad account scope is required.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is efficient. It is arguably too terse given the sibling ambiguity, but every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is read-only, has an output schema covering return values, and full schema coverage on all parameters, so much of the burden is already carried. What is missing is the one thing the description alone can supply: how this differs from meta_get_audiences and what the 'rich fields' actually add.

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 five parameters (type, limit, cursor, adAccountId, audienceIds) are already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema states, but it does not need to.

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?

The description names a specific verb (Read) and resource (custom, saved, and lookalike audiences) with modifiers for pagination and field richness, so the operation is unambiguous. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling tool meta_get_audiences, leaving an agent to guess which of the two audience readers to call.

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?

'where permissions allow' is a caveat rather than usage guidance; it does not tell the agent when to prefer this over meta_get_audiences or when to fall back. There are no exclusions, no prerequisites, and no scenario descriptions.

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

Deploy Server