Google Ads Transparency Monitor MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| APIFY_TOKEN | Yes | An Apify API token from console.apify.com/account/integrations. The server lists its tool without a token; a call needs one. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_google_adsA | List the Google ads a company runs, read from Google's public Ads Transparency Center. Give a company domain (for example stripe.com) or an advertiser name, or lists of either. Returns one row per ad with the advertiser, ad ID, format (text, image, or video), first and last shown dates, a creative link, and the ad's Transparency Center page, plus one company summary row per input with Google's total ad count band, formats seen, and whether the company runs Google ads at all. Rows with no ads, blocked requests, or a changed Google page come back free with a row_status saying so. A run that does not succeed is returned as an error with its run ID. Read-only; requires an APIFY_TOKEN and consumes Apify credits per ad row returned. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
There is only one tool, so there is no possibility of selecting the wrong one. Its purpose (fetching Google Ads Transparency Center data) is unambiguous.
The single tool follows a clear verb_noun pattern (get_google_ads). With only one name there is nothing to be inconsistent with.
One tool is thin for a named 'server', though the domain (read-only ad lookup) is narrow enough that a single flexible tool handling domains, names, and lists is defensible. It sits at the borderline where more granular operations (e.g. per-format or per-advertiser queries) might be expected.
For a read-only transparency lookup, the surface covers the key needs: ad rows, per-company summaries, status rows for no-ads/blocked/changed pages, and error reporting with run IDs. Only minor gaps remain, such as no explicit filtering or historical-comparison operation.