Skip to main content
Glama

google_ads_search_terms_analyze

Analyze Google Ads search term overlap and N-gram distribution to find keyword and negative keyword candidates, with insights on cost and conversions.

Instructions

Analyze keyword/search-term overlap and N-gram distribution for a Google Ads campaign. Returns {campaign_id, period, registered_keywords_count, search_terms_count, overlap_rate (0.0-1.0), ngram_distribution:{unigrams, bigrams, trigrams} (each top-10 of {text, count, cost, conversions}), keyword_candidates:[{search_term, conversions, cost, clicks}] (CV>0 and not yet registered), negative_candidates:[{search_term, cost, clicks, impressions}] (top 20 by cost with cost>0 and conversions=0), insights:[strings]}. Read-only. For rule-scored add/exclude/watch buckets use google_ads_search_terms_review; for the raw unscored term log use google_ads_search_terms_report.

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
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly declares 'Read-only', describes the exact return structure including threshold logic for keyword_candidates and negative_candidates, and explains candidate selection criteria (CV>0, cost>0, conversions=0). It stops short of discussing edge cases like empty results or data availability, but the disclosed behavior is strong.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place. It front-loads the purpose, provides a structured list of return fields because there is no output schema, and ends with sibling routing. The period parameter explanation is thorough but directly actionable, and no filler is present.

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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, this description is highly complete. It defines the full return shape, explains candidate and negative-candidate thresholds, declares read-only behavior, and clearly routes to related tools. An agent has enough context to select, invoke, and interpret the result correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

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 parameter descriptions add meaningful guidance beyond the schema: period defaults, suggested windows for different use cases, GAQL range format, endpoint inclusivity, and the LAST_90_DAYS timezone asymmetry. This elevates the score above baseline.

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 ('Analyze'), a specific resource ('keyword/search-term overlap and N-gram distribution for a Google Ads campaign'), and clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming what it is not: not rule-scored review, not raw unscored report. This makes selection 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?

The description explicitly says when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'For rule-scored add/exclude/watch buckets use google_ads_search_terms_review; for the raw unscored term log use google_ads_search_terms_report.' It also provides period-selection guidance in the schema description, such as using shorter windows for recent changes and LAST_90_DAYS for baselines.

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