Skip to main content
Glama
kLOsk

AdLoop: Google Ads, Reddit Ads & GA4

by kLOsk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Draft removing an entity

remove_entity
Destructive

Draft permanent removal of a Google Ads entity and return a preview; double-confirm before applying, because removed entities cannot be re-enabled.

Instructions

Draft REMOVING an entity — returns a PREVIEW. This is IRREVERSIBLE.

Removed entities cannot be re-enabled; pause_entity is the reversible way to temporarily disable something. Returns a preview with a plan_id and requires_double_confirm=true; nothing changes until confirm_and_apply applies it.

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

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entity_idYesThe resource ID. campaign / ad_group / asset_group / asset: simple numeric ID. ad: "adGroupId~adId" (a bare ad ID is resolved to its ad group). keyword and ad_group_criterion: "adGroupId~criterionId". negative_keyword and campaign_criterion: "campaignId~criterionId" (the resource_id field from get_negative_keywords). shared_criterion: "sharedSetId~criterionId" (the resource_id field from get_negative_keyword_list_keywords). campaign_asset: "campaignId~assetId~fieldType". customer_asset: "assetId~fieldType".
customer_idNoGoogle Ads customer ID (digits, dashes optional). Defaults to the configured account.
entity_typeYes"campaign", "ad_group", "ad", "keyword", "asset_group", "negative_keyword", "shared_criterion", "campaign_asset", "asset", "customer_asset", "ad_group_criterion", or "campaign_criterion".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.27.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / customer_id / description
      Added value: +"Google Ads customer ID (digits, dashes optional). Defaults to\nthe configured account."
    • addedInput schema / properties / entity_id / description
      Added value: +"The resource ID. campaign / ad_group / asset_group / asset: simple numeric\nID. ad: \"adGroupId~adId\" (a bare ad ID is resolved to its ad group).\nkeyword and ad_group_criterion: \"adGroupId~criterionId\".\nnegative_keyword and campaign_criterion: \"campaignId~criterionId\"\n(the resource_id field from get_negative_keywords).\nshared_criterion: \"sharedSetId~criterionId\" (the resource_id field\nfrom get_negative_keyword_list_keywords). campaign_asset:\n\"campaignId~assetId~fieldType\". customer_asset: \"assetId~fieldType\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / entity_type / description
      Added value: +"\"campaign\", \"ad_group\", \"ad\", \"keyword\", \"asset_group\",\n\"negative_keyword\", \"shared_criterion\", \"campaign_asset\", \"asset\",\n\"customer_asset\", \"ad_group_criterion\", or \"campaign_criterion\"."
  2. First observedv0.9.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses irreversibility, that removed entities cannot be re-enabled, that the call returns a preview with plan_id and requires_double_confirm=true, and that no change occurs until confirm_and_apply. This is materially more useful than the annotations alone.

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 description is short, front-loads the irreversible preview warning, and uses clear sentences without waste. The Google Ads API link is a minor addition that does not disrupt readability.

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 destructive draft-operation tool with an output schema present, the description covers the key behavioral contract: preview-only, irreversible, double-confirm required, and confirmation via a sibling tool. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters in detail, including entity_id formats and entity_type values. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Draft REMOVING') and resource ('an entity'), clarifies it returns a preview, and explicitly distinguishes itself from pause_entity and confirm_and_apply. An agent can identify the tool's unique role without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It names the alternative reversible tool (pause_entity) and explains the apply step (confirm_and_apply), making clear when this irreversible removal path is appropriate versus the reversible pause path. Nothing is left to inference.

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