MCP Apple Ads

Apple Ads: List Negative Keywords

apple_ads_list_negative_keywords

Read-only

Lists negative keywords for an ad account or ad group, so you can audit terms that must not trigger ads and stop wasted spend without narrowing positive targeting.

Instructions

List negative keywords — terms that must NOT trigger the ad. These are how wasted spend on irrelevant searches is stopped without narrowing the positive targeting.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "apple_ads_list_negative_keywords"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	How many records to return (1-1000). Apple's own maximum page size is 5000.
`offset`	No	Rows to skip, for paging. The response's `pagination` block says how many exist.
`savePath`	No	Absolute path to also write this result to, as pretty-printed JSON. Use it rather than copying values out of the response into a file by hand. Parent directories are created.
`adGroupId`	No	Only negative keywords in this ad group.
`adAccountId`	No	The ad account to act on. Omit it when you have exactly one or APPLE_ADS_AD_ACCOUNT_ID is set — it is resolved automatically. List them with apple_ads_list_accounts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. It contributes a useful conceptual framing about negative keywords blocking irrelevant searches without narrowing positive targeting, but says nothing about result scope (account-wide vs ad-group), ordering, or how the returned set behaves when no filter is supplied.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, followed by one sentence of genuinely useful conceptual context. No filler, no restatement of the title.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With five optional parameters, no output schema, and only readOnlyHint for annotations, the description covers what the resource is but not what a call returns or the default scope when adGroupId and adAccountId are omitted. Adequate to invoke, thin for interpreting results.

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 limit, offset, savePath, adGroupId, and adAccountId are all already documented with defaults and resolution behavior. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("List negative keywords") and immediately defines the concept as "terms that must NOT trigger the ad," which implicitly separates it from the positive-keyword sibling apple_ads_list_keywords. It does not name that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied through the purpose statement (auditing or managing exclusions that stop wasted spend), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance and no pointer to alternatives such as apple_ads_list_keywords. An agent can infer intent but gets no routing rules.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.