X Ads by Get MCP Ads

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

x ads list campaigns

x_ads_list_campaigns

Read-onlyIdempotent

List X Ads campaigns for an account with filtering, sorting, and cursor pagination, preserving native campaign fields and micro-currency values.

Instructions

List campaigns for an account Native X fields and pagination are preserved; monetary fields ending in _micro are millionths of the account currency.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Search by campaign name (1-255 characters).
`count`	No	Number of records to return per page (1-1000).
`cursor`	No	Pagination cursor from a previous response.
`sort_by`	No	Sort order as attribute-direction, e.g. created_at-asc or updated_at-desc.
`account_id`	Yes	X Ads account ID from X_ADS_ACCOUNT_IDS.
`with_draft`	No	Include draft campaigns in the response (default false).
`campaign_ids`	No	Comma-separated campaign IDs to scope the response to.
`with_deleted`	No	Include soft-deleted campaigns in the response (default false).
`with_total_count`	No	Include the total_count response attribute (default false; exclusive with cursor).
`funding_instrument_ids`	No	Comma-separated funding instrument IDs to scope the results to (max 200).

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

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description's added value is the data conventions: native X fields are preserved and monetary values ending in _micro are millionths of the account currency. That is genuinely useful domain context an agent cannot get from the schema or annotations. It omits any note on default exclusions (drafts/deleted) or paging behavior, which would have raised it further.

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 purpose before the field-convention details. The second clause is slightly run-on and mis-punctuated ('account Native X fields'), but every sentence carries information.

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 10 fully documented parameters, an output schema handling return values, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description only needs to supply purpose and data conventions, which it does. Missing only cross-references to sibling tools and defaults for draft/deleted inclusion.

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 every one of the 10 parameters is documented in the input schema (cursor, count, sort_by, with_deleted, etc.), so the description carries no parameter burden. It adds nothing parameter-specific, which is the expected baseline 3 here.

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 ('List campaigns') scoped to an account, which distinguishes it from x_ads_get_campaign (single campaign) and the nested list tools like x_ads_list_line_items. It stops short of naming any sibling or the relationship between campaigns and line items, so differentiation is inferable rather than explicit.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this list endpoint versus x_ads_get_campaign or the line-item/promoted-post listings, and no mention of prerequisites such as obtaining an account_id or when filtered variants (with_deleted, with_draft, campaign_ids) should be applied. Usage is only implied by the tool name and 'for an account'.

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