Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AdLoop: Google Ads, Reddit Ads & GA4

AdLoop: Google Ads, Reddit Ads & GA4

by kLOsk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Draft negative keywords

add_negative_keywords

Block irrelevant searches by drafting negative keyword additions for a campaign. Returns a preview with a plan_id; nothing changes until you confirm and apply.

Instructions

Draft negative keyword additions — returns a PREVIEW.

Negative keywords prevent your ads from showing for irrelevant searches. They are added at campaign level. Returns a preview with a plan_id; nothing changes until confirm_and_apply applies it.

Google Ads API: https://developers.google.com/google-ads/api/docs/start

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "campaign_id": "<campaign_id>",
      "keywords": "<keywords>"
    },
    "name": "add_negative_keywords"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keywordsYesNegative keyword texts; at least one is required. All share the same match_type.
match_typeNo"EXACT" (default), "PHRASE", or "BROAD".EXACT
campaign_idYesNumeric ID of the campaign that gets the negatives.
customer_idNoGoogle Ads customer ID (digits, e.g. "1234567890"). Empty uses the configured default account.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.27.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / campaign_id / description
      Added value: +"Numeric ID of the campaign that gets the negatives."
    • addedInput schema / properties / customer_id / description
      Added value: +"Google Ads customer ID (digits, e.g. \"1234567890\"). Empty\nuses the configured default account."
    • addedInput schema / properties / keywords / description
      Added value: +"Negative keyword texts; at least one is required. All share\nthe same match_type."
    • addedInput schema / properties / match_type / description
      Added value: +"\"EXACT\" (default), \"PHRASE\", or \"BROAD\"."
  2. First observedv0.9.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations flag readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description usefully clarifies that this is a non-mutating draft returning a plan_id that only takes effect after confirm_and_apply. That resolves the ambiguity of a write-flagged tool that does not actually change anything.

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?

Front-loads the action and the PREVIEW caveat in the first sentence, which is the most decision-relevant information. The explanatory sentence about what negative keywords do is somewhat generic filler but does not derail the structure.

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 the description need not explain return values, yet it still names the plan_id handoff to confirm_and_apply. The preview-then-confirm workflow is fully described; only the routing versus sibling draft tools is left implicit.

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 four parameters (keywords, match_type, campaign_id, customer_id) are already documented with types and defaults. The description adds only the campaign-level placement context and nothing about keyword syntax or match_type semantics, 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 and resource ('Draft negative keyword additions') and immediately scopes it as a preview. The phrase 'added at campaign level' distinguishes it from the list-based siblings like add_to_negative_keyword_list, though it never names them explicitly.

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 two-step workflow ('nothing changes until confirm_and_apply applies it') gives implied usage, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over add_to_negative_keyword_list or propose_negative_keyword_list, nor any when-not condition.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools