Skip to main content
Glama
logly

mureo

by logly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

meta_ads_catalogs_delete

Deletes a Meta product catalog, removing its products and stopping dependent dynamic ad campaigns. Check product_count and confirm first; deletion cascades and is not automatically reversible.

Instructions

Deletes a Product Catalog. Returns a success flag. Destructive and cascades — all products inside and any DPA campaigns consuming the catalog lose their product source and stop serving dynamic ads. Not automatically reversible — record before-state with mureo_state_action_log_append if you may need to roll back. Always call meta_ads_catalogs_get first to check product_count and operator-confirm before calling this.

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.
account_idNoMeta Ads account ID in the format 'act_XXXXXXXXXX' (e.g. 'act_1234567890'). Optional — falls back to META_ADS_ACCOUNT_ID from the configured credentials. The leading 'act_' prefix is required.
catalog_idYesCatalog ID to delete.
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. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.37
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  6. Addedv0.9.12
  7. Removedv0.9.6
  8. Addedv0.9.2
  9. Removedv0.9.1
  10. Addedv1.0.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With zero annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses the cascade (products inside and DPA campaigns lose their product source and stop serving dynamic ads), states the loss is not automatically reversible, names the mitigation tool, and notes the response shape ('Returns a success flag'). These are exactly the risk traits an agent needs before a destructive call, none of which are derivable from structured fields.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its blast radius before the procedural advice. No filler; the ordering (what it does → what breaks → how to recover → what to check first) matches how an agent should reason about a destructive call.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers impact scope, reversibility, rollback path, response value, and the required operator-confirmation workflow. Nothing material is missing for a 6-parameter destructive tool whose schema and nested objects are fully self-documented.

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 all six parameters — including the nested approval object and expected-effects array — are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond referencing product_count from the sibling get tool, 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Deletes a Product Catalog') and immediately distinguishes it from siblings by naming the pre-check tool (meta_ads_catalogs_get) and the rollback journal (mureo_state_action_log_append). An agent can tell this apart from meta_ads_products_delete or meta_ads_catalogs_create without opening any 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?

Gives explicit preconditions ('Always call meta_ads_catalogs_get first to check product_count and operator-confirm before calling this') and a concrete alternative for the rollback need (record before-state with mureo_state_action_log_append). Both the when-to-use and the adjacent-tool routing are spelled out rather than implied.

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