Skip to main content
Glama
logly

mureo

by logly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

meta_ads_conversions_send_purchase

Sends a single Purchase event to Meta Conversions API with value, currency, and user identifiers, returning Meta's events_received acknowledgement for purchase tracking.

Instructions

Sends a single Purchase event via the Meta Conversions API — the most common CAPI use case. Returns Meta's events_received acknowledgement. Mutating on Meta's side. Required fields model a typical purchase: amount, currency, and hashed user identifiers. For other event types use meta_ads_conversions_send_lead (leads) or the generic meta_ads_conversions_send (AddToCart / custom events / batching multiple events).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYesPurchase amount in the specified currency. Decimal for currencies with minor units (USD 9.99); integer is fine for JPY.
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)
currencyYesISO 4217 currency code (USD, JPY, EUR, GBP). Must match the ad account's reporting currency or be one that Meta can convert.
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.
pixel_idYesMeta Pixel ID the event is attributed to. Find via meta_ads_pixels_list. CAPI events flow into the same pixel as browser events; dedupe happens on event_id if one is supplied in user_data / custom_data.
user_dataYesUser identifying fields for attribution. Supported keys: em (email), ph (phone), fn (first_name), ln (last_name), zp (zip), ct (city), st (state), country, external_id, client_ip_address, client_user_agent, fbc (click ID), fbp (browser ID). mureo hashes em / ph / fn / ln / zp / ct / st / country / external_id with SHA-256 before sending — pass raw PII; do not pre-hash.
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.
event_timeYesUNIX timestamp (seconds) of the purchase. Must be within the last 7 days.
content_idsNoProduct IDs associated with the purchase — catalog retailer_ids for DPA attribution. Optional but recommended when a catalog is in use.
decision_idNoA proposed decision this change carries out.
test_event_codeNoMeta Events Manager test_event_code. When set, the event is routed to the test event stream visible in Events Manager instead of production reporting. Use for validation; drop the field once verified. Get the code from Events Manager → Test Events tab.
event_source_urlNoFully-qualified URL where the event occurred. Required by Meta for action_source='website' events; recommended for any browser-triggered CAPI event to improve attribution match rate.

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. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.7
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "account_id",
-  "pixel_id",
-  "event_time",
-  "user_data",
-  "currency",
-  "value"
-]New value: +[
+  "pixel_id",
+  "event_time",
+  "user_data",
+  "currency",
+  "value"
+]
  7. Addedv0.9.12
  8. Removedv0.9.6
  9. Addedv0.9.2
  10. Removedv0.9.1
  11. Addedv1.0.5

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states that the operation is mutating on Meta's side and returns Meta's events_received acknowledgement, but it does not mention permissions, rate limits, error behavior, retractability, or idempotency concerns for a production CAPI mutation.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose, then concisely covers return acknowledgement, mutation status, required-field shape, and alternative tools. Every sentence contributes to tool selection or safe invocation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the full 100% schema coverage, the description supplies enough context for an agent to select and call the tool: purpose, mutation status, return acknowledgement, and sibling alternatives. With no output schema, the explicit events_received acknowledgement is helpful; the remaining gap is richer operational behavior such as permissions and error handling.

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 documents all 13 parameters in detail, so the baseline is 3. The description only broadly notes that required fields model a typical purchase (amount, currency, user identifiers), which adds little beyond the schema and slightly blurs that user_data should be passed as raw PII rather than pre-hashed.

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 and resource: sending a single Purchase event via the Meta Conversions API. It explicitly distinguishes this from the sibling tools meta_ads_conversions_send_lead and meta_ads_conversions_send, so an agent can identify the right tool 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?

It names the exact alternative tools and the conditions that select them: send_lead for leads, and the generic send tool for AddToCart, custom events, or batching multiple events. This gives explicit when-to-use guidance rather than merely implying context.

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