Skip to main content
Glama
logly

mureo

by logly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

google_ads_negative_placements_add

Batch-exclude websites, mobile apps, and app categories at campaign or ad group level to stop ads serving on unwanted placements. Reversible as one rollback unit.

Instructions

Excludes websites, mobile apps and/or mobile app categories from delivery, in one batch, at campaign or ad group level. Returns level, the scope id, count, and per entry the created criterion_id, resource_name, type and value. Mutating and delivery-affecting — a large exclusion batch can take a Display campaign to zero impressions. Recorded in STATE.json's action_log with an observation window, and reversible as one unit via rollback_apply, which removes exactly the criteria this call created. Exclude search terms with google_ads_negative_keywords_add instead.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonNoWhy this change is being made: one or two sentences naming the evidence and the expected effect. Stored in the journal and on the action_log entry this call produces, for the operator and the next session.
approvalNoExternal approval this change carries out (recorded and shown, never verified)
expectedNoExpected effects [{metric, direction, target?, horizon_days?, primary?}], exactly one primary:true when several; metric cpa/cpc/cpl/cpm/conversions/cvr/ctr/roas/cost/spend/clicks/impressions; direction up/down/hold.
placementsYesExclusions to add. Types can be mixed in one call; the whole batch becomes a single reversible action_log entry.
ad_group_idNoAd group ID for an ad group-level exclusion. Supply exactly one of campaign_id or ad_group_id. Ad group-level exclusions do not cascade to sibling ad groups.
campaign_idNoCampaign ID for a campaign-level exclusion. Supply exactly one of campaign_id or ad_group_id — the two are separate criteria and campaign-level exclusions apply to every ad group under the campaign.
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.
decision_idNoA proposed decision this change carries out.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.33.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / expected / description
      Previous value: -"Expected effects [{metric, direction, target?, horizon_days?}]; metric cpa/cpc/cpl/cpm/conversions/cvr/ctr/roas/cost/spend/clicks/impressions; direction up/down/hold."New value: +"Expected effects [{metric, direction, target?, horizon_days?, primary?}], exactly one primary:true when several; metric cpa/cpc/cpl/cpm/conversions/cvr/ctr/roas/cost/spend/clicks/impressions; direction up/down/hold."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.28.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / approval
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "External approval this change carries out (recorded and shown, never verified)",
+  "properties": {
+    "approved_at": {
+      "maxLength": 64,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "approved_by": {
+      "maxLength": 80,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "reference": {
+      "maxLength": 128,
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "reference",
+    "approved_by",
+    "approved_at"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.26.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / decision_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "A proposed decision this change carries out.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / expected
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Expected effects [{metric, direction, target?, horizon_days?}]; metric cpa/cpc/cpl/cpm/conversions/cvr/ctr/roas/cost/spend/clicks/impressions; direction up/down/hold.",
+  "maxItems": 12,
+  "type": "array"
+}
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv0.20.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / reason
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Why this change is being made: one or two sentences naming the evidence and the expected effect. Stored in the journal and on the action_log entry this call produces, for the operator and the next session.",
+  "maxLength": 500,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. Addedv0.10.44

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it declares the call mutating and delivery-affecting, warns that a large batch can take a Display campaign to zero impressions, states batch atomicity, records the action in STATE.json's action_log with an observation window, and names rollback_apply as the exact inverse.

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?

Four compact sentences, front-loaded with what is excluded and where, followed by return shape, risk profile, reversibility and the sibling hand-off. No filler and no repetition of the schema.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the return payload (level, scope id, count, and per-entry criterion_id, resource_name, type, value). Combined with the risk warning, journaling behavior and rollback path, an agent has everything needed to call this safely in a mutating workflow.

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 nested placement type/value semantics, the campaign_id/ad_group_id exclusivity and the customer_id fallback are all already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing further about parameters; its extra detail concerns return values rather than inputs, so the 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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Excludes websites, mobile apps and/or mobile app categories') plus scope ('in one batch, at campaign or ad group level'), which is enough to separate it from the sibling remove tool and from negative keyword tools.

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 routes search-term exclusions to google_ads_negative_keywords_add, so the nearest ambiguous alternative is covered. It does not, however, state when to prefer campaign-level vs ad-group-level exclusion in the prose (that is left to the schema descriptions) or when not to exclude at all.

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