X Ads by Get MCP Ads

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

x ads get targeting criterion

x_ads_get_targeting_criterion

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single X Ads targeting criterion by account ID and criterion ID to inspect its targeting details; optionally include deleted criteria or localized names.

Instructions

Get a single targeting criterion by ID Native X fields and pagination are preserved; monetary fields ending in _micro are millionths of the account currency.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lang`	No	BCP-47 language code; adds a localized_name response attribute for localizable criteria.
`account_id`	Yes	X Ads account ID from X_ADS_ACCOUNT_IDS.
`with_deleted`	No	Include the criterion even if soft-deleted (default false).
`targeting_criterion_id`	Yes	Targeting criterion ID belonging to the selected X Ads account.

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 changedv1.1.1Oct 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 observedv1.0.1Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two useful traits beyond that — native X field preservation and the _micro monetary unit convention — but the 'pagination preserved' note is confusing for a single-record get and no auth or soft-delete behavior is mentioned.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with the core action. The second clause is jammed on without punctuation and mixes two unrelated facts (field preservation, monetary units), which slightly hurts readability.

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, full parameter coverage and complete annotations, the description only needs to orient the agent, and it does. The only real gap is the absence of any soft-delete or usage context around with_deleted.

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 account_id, targeting_criterion_id, lang and with_deleted are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case.

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 and resource ('Get a single targeting criterion by ID'), which implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling x_ads_list_targeting_criteria by returning one record. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'single ... by ID' versus the list sibling; there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative named. An agent can infer the routing but must do the work itself.

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