Skip to main content
Glama
logly

mureo

by logly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

google_ads_auction_insights_get

Retrieve raw impression-share metrics for a Google Ads campaign to diagnose lost search impressions from rank or budget constraints.

Instructions

Fetch raw impression-share metrics for one Google Ads campaign. Returns a list with a single entry: {campaign_id, campaign_name, search_impression_share, search_rank_lost_is, search_budget_lost_is, search_top_is, search_abs_top_is, note} — every IS field is a percentage (0-100, float, rounded to 1 decimal) or None. On failure returns a single-element list with {error:'auction_insights_unavailable'|'no_data', reason, hint}. Read-only. Note: Google Ads API v23 removed competitor-level auction_insight (domain, overlap, outranking); only impression-share proxies are returned. For a version with human-readable insights layered on top use google_ads_auction_insights_analyze.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
periodNoReporting window for the metrics. Default 'LAST_30_DAYS'. Use a shorter window (LAST_7_DAYS / LAST_14_DAYS) when diagnosing recent changes; use LAST_90_DAYS for trend baselines. Also accepts an explicit range in GAQL spelling — "BETWEEN 'YYYY-MM-DD' AND 'YYYY-MM-DD'", both endpoints inclusive, in the account's time zone — for a window no trailing constant can reach (e.g. a single past calendar month). One asymmetry to know about: every constant except LAST_90_DAYS is resolved by Google Ads in the account's reporting time zone, whereas LAST_90_DAYS has no API constant and is expanded by mureo into the 90 days ending yesterday **on the server's date**, so its edges can differ by a day when the server and the account are in different zones. Pass an explicit range when the exact boundary matters.
campaign_idYesCampaign ID as a numeric string without dashes (e.g. '23743184133'). Obtain via google_ads_campaigns_list.
customer_idNoGoogle Ads customer ID as a 10-digit string without dashes (e.g. '1234567890'). Optional — falls back to GOOGLE_ADS_CUSTOMER_ID / GOOGLE_ADS_LOGIN_CUSTOMER_ID from the configured credentials when omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.17.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / period / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "enum": [
+      "TODAY",
+      "YESTERDAY",
+      "THIS_WEEK_SUN_TODAY",
+      "THIS_WEEK_MON_TODAY",
+      "LAST_BUSINESS_WEEK",
+      "LAST_WEEK_SUN_SAT",
+      "LAST_WEEK_MON_SUN",
+      "LAST_7_DAYS",
+      "LAST_14_DAYS",
+      "LAST_30_DAYS",
+      "LAST_90_DAYS",
+      "THIS_MONTH",
+      "LAST_MONTH"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "\\ABETWEEN '([0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2})' AND '([0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2})'\\Z",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / period / description
      Previous value: -"Reporting window for the metrics. Default 'LAST_30_DAYS'. Use a shorter window (LAST_7_DAYS / LAST_14_DAYS) when diagnosing recent changes; use LAST_90_DAYS for trend baselines."New value: +"Reporting window for the metrics. Default 'LAST_30_DAYS'. Use a shorter window (LAST_7_DAYS / LAST_14_DAYS) when diagnosing recent changes; use LAST_90_DAYS for trend baselines. Also accepts an explicit range in GAQL spelling — \"BETWEEN 'YYYY-MM-DD' AND 'YYYY-MM-DD'\", both endpoints inclusive, in the account's time zone — for a window no trailing constant can reach (e.g. a single past calendar month). One asymmetry to know about: every constant except LAST_90_DAYS is resolved by Google Ads in the account's reporting time zone, whereas LAST_90_DAYS has no API constant and is expanded by mureo into the 90 days ending yesterday **on the server's date**, so its edges can differ by a day when the server and the account are in different zones. Pass an explicit range when the exact boundary matters."
    • removedInput schema / properties / period / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "TODAY",
-  "YESTERDAY",
-  "LAST_7_DAYS",
-  "LAST_14_DAYS",
-  "LAST_30_DAYS",
-  "LAST_90_DAYS",
-  "THIS_MONTH",
-  "LAST_MONTH"
-]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.37
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Addedv0.9.12
  4. Removedv0.9.6
  5. Addedv0.9.2
  6. Removedv0.9.1
  7. Addedv1.0.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden — and it delivers: exact return shape (single-entry list, field names, 0-100 float percentages rounded to 1 decimal or None), an error contract with enumerated codes ('auction_insights_unavailable'|'no_data', reason, hint), an explicit 'Read-only' declaration, and the v23 API caveat that competitor-level auction_insight is no longer returned. This prevents an agent from expecting competitor fields that no longer exist.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the opening sentence, and every subsequent clause earns its place: return contract, error contract, read-only flag, API-version limitation, and sibling routing. Despite covering substantial ground, there is no filler or repetition.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values and safety — and it does: field types, error variants, read-only behavior, and the version limitation are all stated, while the schema fully documents parameters. Nothing an agent needs to call or parse the tool 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% and the schema itself is exceptionally rich (period window guidance, GAQL range syntax, the LAST_90_DAYS timezone-asymmetry warning, campaign_id source, customer_id fallback). The description adds no parameter detail beyond 'one Google Ads campaign,' which is fine — at 100% coverage the schema does the heavy lifting and the baseline of 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+scope: 'Fetch raw impression-share metrics for one Google Ads campaign.' The word 'raw' plus the final sentence routing to google_ads_auction_insights_analyze differentiates it from the human-readable sibling, and the enumerated return fields make the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative google_ads_auction_insights_analyze and the condition that selects it ('a version with human-readable insights layered on top'). It also frames this tool as the raw-data, single-campaign counterpart, so an agent can reliably choose between the two siblings without opening either schema.

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

Install Server

Other Tools