Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Ads MCP Server

Google Ads MCP Server

by nexoradev-stack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_ad_group

Read-only

Retrieve details for a single Google Ads ad group by customer ID and ad group ID.

Instructions

Get details for a single ad group.

Args:
    customer_id: Google Ads customer ID.
    ad_group_id: Ad group ID.

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>",
      "ad_group_id": "<ad_group_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_ad_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ad_group_idYes
customer_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say what happens when the ad group ID is invalid or not found, nor what level of detail is returned.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The summary sentence is front-loaded and efficient. The Args block adds bulk without adding meaning, since it duplicates the schema property names rather than documenting constraints.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a lookup tool with no output schema, so the description should indicate what 'details' means and how failures surface. It does neither, leaving an agent unable to predict the response shape for a read that returns a single entity.

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

Parameters2/5

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 for both parameters, but it only restates the names with a tautological gloss ('Ad group ID'). The one marginal addition is identifying customer_id as a 'Google Ads customer ID', which hints at format expectations, but no syntax or example is given.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Get details for a single ad group.' The 'single' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from list_ad_groups and from the mutation siblings (create/update/set_ad_group_status), but it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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 guidance on when to use this versus get_ad_group_performance or list_ad_groups, and no prerequisites stated. An agent must infer the correct entry point from the name alone.

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