Skip to main content
Glama
logly

mureo

by logly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

google_ads_schedule_targeting_update

Update Google Ads campaign ad schedules by adding day/hour slots or removing existing criteria in a single mutate, simplifying schedule targeting changes.

Instructions

Add and/or remove ad-schedule criteria on a Google Ads campaign in a single mutate. Returns [{resource_name}] — one entry per operation (adds first, then removes). Mutating — new schedule criteria default to start_minute/end_minute=ZERO (on the hour). Reversible only by calling this tool again with inverse operations. At least one of add_schedules / remove_criterion_ids must be provided. For the read-only listing use google_ads_schedule_targeting_list.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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.
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.
add_schedulesNoList of schedules to create. Each entry maps to one AdSchedule criterion.
remove_criterion_idsNoExisting criterion_ids to remove (numeric strings). Obtain via google_ads_schedule_targeting_list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.10.37
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "required": [
+      "add_schedules"
+    ]
+  },
+  {
+    "required": [
+      "remove_criterion_ids"
+    ]
+  }
+]
  3. Addedv0.10.11
  4. Removedv0.10.9
  5. Addedv0.9.12
  6. Removedv0.9.6
  7. Addedv0.9.2
  8. Removedv0.9.1
  9. Addedv1.0.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
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 thoroughly: it discloses that this is a mutating operation, that new schedules default to start_minute/end_minute=ZERO, that reversibility requires calling the tool again with inverse operations, and that returns are ordered (adds first, then removes). No contradictions 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?

The description is compact yet information-dense, front-loading the core action and then delivering essential behavioral details (return format, defaults, reversibility, preconditions, sibling routing). Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: return format and ordering, default behavior, reversibility, preconditions, and a pointer to the read-only alternative. Combined with the fully described schema, an agent can correctly invoke this tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add significant parameter meaning beyond the schema—it merely names add_schedules and remove_criterion_ids. The 'at least one' constraint is already captured in the schema's anyOf, and parameter descriptions in the schema are already thorough.

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 ('Add and/or remove') and resource ('ad-schedule criteria on a Google Ads campaign'), and distinguishes it from the sibling read-only tool by naming google_ads_schedule_targeting_list. An agent can clearly tell this tool's purpose and scope 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?

The description explicitly directs read-only needs to 'google_ads_schedule_targeting_list', creating a clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use distinction. It also states the required condition that at least one of add_schedules or remove_criterion_ids must be provided, which is a key usage constraint.

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