Google Ads MCP Server

get_asset_performance

Read-only

Retrieve asset-level performance labels for Performance Max campaigns, optionally filtered by campaign or asset group, so you can identify which assets perform well and which need attention.

Instructions

Get asset-level performance labels (BEST, GOOD, LOW, etc.) for PMax.

Args:
    customer_id: Google Ads customer ID.
    campaign_id: Optional -- filter to a specific campaign.
    asset_group_id: Optional -- filter to a specific asset group.

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>"
    },
    "name": "get_asset_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`campaign_id`	No
`customer_id`	Yes
`asset_group_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered; the description adds that the payload consists of performance label values and gives example enumerations (BEST, GOOD, LOW). It does not disclose volume, pagination, or whether supporting metrics accompany the labels, which matters for an open-world read.

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?

Front-loaded single-sentence purpose followed by a compact Args block; no filler. The docstring formatting is slightly mechanical but efficient and easy to scan.

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?

A simple read tool with no output schema, so the description carries more burden in describing results; the label examples help, but return shape, granularity (one row per asset?) and whether metrics are included remain unstated. Adequate minimum viable, not comprehensive.

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 0%, so the description is the only source; it does name all three parameters and clarify that campaign_id and asset_group_id are optional filters. However, it adds no format guidance (customer ID formatting, ID types) beyond what the parameter names already imply.

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?

Specific verb + resource + scope: 'asset-level performance labels (BEST, GOOD, LOW, etc.) for PMax'. An agent can tell this is about per-asset rating within Performance Max, distinct from placement or asset-group detail tools. It stops short of explicitly naming the nearest siblings, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 by scope: query this when you need asset-level quality labels. There is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance, no mention of alternatives such as get_pmax_placement_performance or get_asset_group_details, and no prerequisites stated.

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

Deploy Server