Skip to main content
Glama

list_rf_predictions

Retrieve paginated reach and frequency predictions for a Meta ad account to forecast campaign audience size and exposure.

Instructions

List reach & frequency predictions for the ad account. Returns paginated results.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
afterNoPagination cursor for next page
limitNoNumber of results (default 25)
fieldsNoComma-separated fields to return
account_idNoAd 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.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.6.1
    • 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"
      +}
  2. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 behavioral burden. It does disclose that results are paginated, which is genuine added context, but it omits ordering, permissions, whether the list can be empty, and any rate-limit behavior. Adequate but thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, followed by the pagination property. Nothing is redundant, though the second sentence is somewhat generic.

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 4-parameter read-list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials but not much more. It never says what a prediction record contains, how results are ordered, or the default page size behavior beyond what the schema states.

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 every parameter (after, limit, fields, account_id) is already documented in the schema, including the META_AD_ACCOUNT_ID fallback. The description adds no syntax or format guidance beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: lists reach & frequency predictions scoped to the ad account. It is clear on its own, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling rf-prediction tools (get_rf_prediction, create_rf_prediction, delete_rf_prediction) that share the same noun.

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?

The description gives no indication of when to use this list tool versus get_rf_prediction for a single prediction or the create/delete siblings. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated; the agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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