Skip to main content
Glama
logly

mureo

by logly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

meta_ads_lead_forms_update

Update a Meta Ads lead form's lifecycle status to stop or resume new submissions. Archive a form to retire it while keeping existing leads; reactivate it to undo the archive.

Instructions

Changes a lead form's lifecycle status. This tool updates only the status field — other form fields (questions, privacy_policy_url, name, follow_up_action_url, locale, advanced layout) are intentionally out of scope; Meta's post-creation mutability has shifted between versions, so mureo stays conservative. Pass status=ARCHIVED to retire a form (existing leads stay queryable; the form stops accepting new submissions). Pass status=ACTIVE to undo an archive. Mutating, reversible (re-call with the opposite value).

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.
statusYesTarget status. ACTIVE accepts submissions; ARCHIVED stops them. Other values (DRAFT, DELETED, DELETION_PENDING) appear in read paths but cannot be set by an operator.
form_idYesLead form ID to update.
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.

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. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.37
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Addedv0.9.17

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so excellently. It discloses that the operation is mutating, reversible, that archiving keeps existing leads queryable, and that the form stops accepting new submissions. It also explains the conservative design rationale around Meta's shifting mutability, which is valuable context beyond the schema.

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 core action, then scopes the operation, then gives concrete usage patterns, and finishes with reversibility. Every sentence earns its place; the rationale about Meta's mutability shifts explains why the tool is intentionally narrow. It is appropriately sized for the complexity.

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?

Given the moderate complexity, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers what changes, what does not change, status semantics, side effects, reversibility, and operational intent. No critical context is missing.

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 reinforces the status semantics with concrete examples, but the schema already documents ACTIVE and ARCHIVED well. The description adds the 'existing leads stay queryable' nuance, providing some marginal value beyond the schema, but does not need to compensate for missing parameter documentation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Changes a lead form's lifecycle status.' It further distinguishes itself by explicitly listing out-of-scope fields (questions, privacy_policy_url, name, follow_up_action_url, locale, advanced layout), making it clear this is a narrow status-only tool rather than a general lead form editor.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: use ARCHIVED to retire a form and ACTIVE to undo an archive. It also states what is out of scope, implying when not to use this tool for other field modifications. It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling tool, but the exclusion is strong enough for an agent to route correctly.

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