paid-media-mcp

list_conversion_apis

List all Conversion API implementations for paid media platforms. Filter by platform to see events sent, match rate, and deduplication method.

Instructions

List all Conversion API implementations (Meta CAPI, Google Enhanced Conversions, TikTok Events API, etc.): events sent, match rate, deduplication method. Filter by platform.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_conversion_apis"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`platform`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It implies a read-only list operation but does not explicitly state safety, authentication needs, or side effects. No destructive or rate-limit info is provided.

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 minimal and front-loaded: two sentences covering purpose, examples, returned fields, and filtering. No superfluous words.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what is listed (conversion API implementations) and the data fields (events, match rate, dedup method). It could mention pagination or what happens with no filter, but overall it is quite complete.

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?

The only parameter, 'platform', lacks a schema description (0% coverage). The description adds that it filters by platform, which gives some meaning, but does not explain default behavior (e.g., if omitted, returns all) or the impact of each enum value.

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 clearly identifies the verb (list), the resource (Conversion API implementations), and the scope (all, with examples). It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_pixels_and_tags by specifying the domain (conversion APIs with specific platforms).

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?

The description does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_pixels_and_tags or get_website_data_capture. No explicit when/when-not or alternative references are given.

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

Deploy Server