AdLoop: Google Ads, Reddit Ads & GA4

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Draft a Tag Manager tag

draft_gtm_tag

Create or update a Google Tag Manager tag in a workspace and return a preview before publishing. Requires write access; Custom HTML needs explicit permission.

Instructions

Draft creating or updating a Tag Manager tag — returns a PREVIEW.

Without tag_id this creates a tag in a workspace; with tag_id it updates the existing tag. The edit lands in the workspace and changes nothing on the site until the workspace is published. Refused unless gtm.write_enabled is set, and Custom HTML (html) is refused as well unless gtm.allow_custom_html is set. Returns the resolved workspace, the tag type, the fields that would change and a plan_id.

Tag Manager API: https://developers.google.com/tag-platform/tag-manager/api/v2

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Tag name, 1-200 characters. Required when creating a tag.
`notes`	No	Free-form note stored on the tag. None keeps the current note.
`paused`	No	True stores the tag paused instead of deleting it. None keeps the current state.
`tag_id`	No	Existing tag ID to update (see list_gtm_tags). Empty creates a new tag.
`tag_type`	No	Tag type, required when creating a tag because GTM cannot change a tag's type later: googtag, gaawe (GA4 event), awct (Ads conversion), awcc, awud, sp (Ads remarketing), gclidw, flc, fls, img, html (Custom HTML) or cvt_<id> for a Community Gallery template.
`parameters`	No	GTM parameter dicts with at least "type" and "key", for example gaawe [{"type": "TEMPLATE", "key": "eventName", "value": "form_submit"}] or awct [{"type": "TEMPLATE", "key": "conversionId", "value": "123456789"}, {"type": "TEMPLATE", "key": "conversionLabel", "value": "AbC-dEf"}]. On update they merge by key: passed keys replace, other keys stay.
`workspace_id`	No	Workspace to edit (see list_gtm_workspaces). Empty uses the Default Workspace, or the only workspace there is.
`gtm_account_id`	No	Numeric GTM account ID (see list_gtm_accounts). Empty uses gtm.account_id from the config.
`gtm_container_id`	No	Numeric GTM container ID (see list_gtm_containers). Empty uses gtm.container_id from the config.
`firing_trigger_ids`	No	Trigger IDs that fire the tag (see list_gtm_triggers). The built-in All Pages trigger is "2147479553".
`blocking_trigger_ids`	No	Trigger IDs that must not fire the tag.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.27.1Oct 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (which only say destructiveHint=false): it discloses that the call returns a PREVIEW, that nothing changes on the live site until the workspace is published, the two feature-flag preconditions that cause refusal, and the exact return payload (workspace, tag type, changed fields, plan_id). This is exactly the extra context annotations cannot carry.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The preview and create/update rules come first, followed by gating and return contract, with an API doc link last. Every sentence is load-bearing and nothing is padded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a preview-oriented draft tool with full annotation coverage, a complete 11-param schema and an output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs: gating preconditions, mutation scope, and return shape. No gaps remain.

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 each of the 11 parameters is already documented in the schema. The description only adds the tag_id create/update semantics, which is already echoed in the schema, so it does not meaningfully extend parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Draft creating or updating a Tag Manager tag') and immediately pins the scope with the tag_id create-vs-update split. This clearly separates it from sibling draft tools like draft_gtm_trigger, draft_delete_gtm_entity and draft_publish_gtm_workspace.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly tells the agent that omitting tag_id creates and supplying tag_id updates, and states the gating conditions (gtm.write_enabled, gtm.allow_custom_html) under which the call is refused. It does not, however, name when to prefer this over sibling drafters, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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

Deploy Server