meta-ads-mcp

list_catalogs

Retrieves product catalogs for a Meta ad account, with optional pagination, field selection, and account ID fallback, so you can inspect available catalogs.

Instructions

List product catalogs for the ad account.

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": "list_catalogs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`after`	No	Pagination cursor for next page
`limit`	No	Number of results to return
`fields`	No	Comma-separated fields to return
`account_id`	No	Ad account ID to query (e.g. 'act_123' or '123'). Falls back to META_AD_ACCOUNT_ID env var if omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.6.1Oct 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / account_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ad account ID to query (e.g. 'act_123' or '123'). Falls back to META_AD_ACCOUNT_ID env var if omitted.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedv1.2.0Mar 19, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the listing purpose. It does not mention read-only behavior, pagination, permissions, or what the returned catalog list contains.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the operation and resource.

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?

For a simple list operation with fully described parameters, the definition is minimally sufficient. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it could have explained return shape or pagination behavior to be more complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is acceptable given the schema already does that work.

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 gives a specific verb ("List") and resource ("product catalogs") scoped to the ad account, so the core purpose is clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby catalog tools such as get_catalog or create_catalog, which keeps it below a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_catalog or list_product_sets. The listing intent is implied, but neither exclusions nor usage context are provided.

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

Deploy Server