Google Ads MCP Server

add_audience_signal

Add audience signals and search themes to a Performance Max asset group so Google’s AI can find the right customers; these signals guide suggestions, not hard targeting constraints.

Instructions

Add audience or search theme signals to a PMax asset group.

Audience signals help Google's AI find the right customers. They're suggestions,
not hard targeting constraints.

Args:
    customer_id: Google Ads customer ID.
    asset_group_id: Asset group ID.
    audience_resource_name: Audience resource name (from audience manager).
    search_themes: List of search theme strings (keywords that describe your ideal customer).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "customer_id": "<customer_id>",
      "asset_group_id": "<asset_group_id>"
    },
    "name": "add_audience_signal"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`customer_id`	Yes
`search_themes`	No
`asset_group_id`	Yes
`audience_resource_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds genuinely useful semantic context — that the added signals are AI suggestions, not hard targeting constraints — but says nothing about what happens on duplicate signals, whether the call is additive vs. replacing, or what the response reports.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and target, followed by two short sentences of behavioral context and a clean Args block. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and no schema descriptions, the definition covers the basics but leaves gaps: the requirement that at least one of audience_resource_name or search_themes be provided, error behavior for an invalid asset group, and what the return value contains are all unaddressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it documents all four parameters, including the useful hint that audience_resource_name comes from audience manager and that search_themes are keyword-like strings describing the ideal customer. It does not clarify the important oddity that both signal parameters are optional, leaving unclear whether at least one must be supplied.

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 ('Add') plus the two resource types it accepts ('audience or search theme signals') and the target ('a PMax asset group'). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like add_keywords or add_assets_to_group, though the description never explicitly names those alternatives.

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?

The usage context is implied by 'Add ... to a PMax asset group' and reinforced by the note that signals are suggestions rather than hard targeting. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the asset group must already exist), and no routing to a sibling tool for hard targeting or keyword-based alternatives.

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

Deploy Server