Meta Ads by Get MCP Ads

meta get brand safety controls

meta_get_brand_safety_controls

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads brand safety, suitability, placement, and context-control signals from Meta ad account or ad set targeting, with optional block-list metadata for auditing and configuring ad placements.

Instructions

Read brand safety, suitability, placement, and context-control signals from ad account/ad set targeting and optional block-list edges.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`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
`adsetIds`	No	Specific ad set IDs to inspect. If omitted, reads ad sets from the ad account.
`businessId`	No	Optional Business Manager ID for block-list discovery.
`adAccountId`	Yes	Ad account ID (e.g., act_123456789)
`includeAdsets`	No	Include ad set configuration when checking brand safety.
`includeBlockLists`	No	Include accessible brand-safety block-list metadata.
`includeRawTargeting`	No	Include the native targeting specification for diagnostics.

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

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, lowering the burden. The description adds that output spans targeting-derived signals plus optional block-list edges, but says nothing about permission requirements for Business Manager block lists (openWorldHint=true implies external dependency), rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema states.

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 listing the signal categories and their source, with no filler. It is dense but every clause carries scope information; only mild ambiguity from packing four signal types into one list keeps it off a 5.

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 and fully documented parameters, the description only needs to frame what class of data comes back, which it does ('brand safety, suitability, placement, and context-control signals'). What remains thin is the block-list/Business Manager dependency, which is only gestured at via the optional businessId parameter.

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 every parameter including limit, cursor, adsetIds, businessId, and the three include* flags is already documented in structured data. The description only loosely maps its wording onto adAccountId/adsetIds/businessId and adds no format or interaction details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific resource class (brand safety, suitability, placement, context-control signals), plus the source (ad account/ad set targeting and block-list edges). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling list, which contains no other brand-safety tool, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'read ... from ad account/ad set targeting' implies an inspection/audit use case, and the optional block-list edge mention hints at a secondary mode. But there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or routing to a sibling such as meta_get_adset_configuration or meta_search_targeting_options.

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

Deploy Server