Skip to main content
Glama
kLOsk

Google Ads - AdLoop

by kLOsk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Performance Max performance

get_pmax_performance
Read-only

Retrieve Performance Max campaign and asset group metrics, including ad strength and network type breakdowns, for a specified customer ID and date range.

Instructions

Get Performance Max campaign and asset group performance.

Returns two result sets:

  • campaigns: PMax campaign metrics broken down by ad_network_type (SEARCH, CONTENT, YOUTUBE_SEARCH, YOUTUBE_WATCH, MIXED). Note: MIXED is a catch-all that Google uses for most PMax traffic — full channel splits are not available via the API.

  • asset_groups: per-asset-group metrics including ad_strength (EXCELLENT, GOOD, AVERAGE, POOR).

Includes insights flagging weak ad strength, zero-conversion asset groups, and network type distribution. Date format: "YYYY-MM-DD". Empty = last 30 days.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
customer_idNo
date_range_endNo
date_range_startNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.13.2
  2. Removedv0.13.0
  3. First observedv0.9.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safe/read-only nature. The description adds result-set expectations but no additional behavioral disclosure beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Bulleted result sets make the structure readable, and the content is not excessive. Minor redundancy exists around ad strength and network-type insights, but it does not materially hurt clarity.

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?

The description covers PMax-specific context, channel split limitations, ad strength values, and date defaults. It omits customer_id semantics, but the output schema is present so return values need not be fully restated.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The date format and empty-default behavior are mentioned for date_range_start/end, but customer_id is not explained. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate more fully for parameter meanings.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves Performance Max campaign and asset group performance, and enumerates the two result sets. This is specific enough to distinguish it from generic campaign/ad performance tools.

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 Performance Max scope and MIXED channel caveat give useful context, but the description never explicitly says when to choose this over sibling tools like get_campaign_performance or get_asset_performance.

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