meta-mcp

List campaigns under an ad account

campaigns_list

List campaigns for a Meta ad account. Filter, select fields, and paginate to manage advertising campaigns.

Instructions

GET /act_{id}/campaigns.

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": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>"
    },
    "name": "campaigns_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`account_id`	Yes
`fields`	No
`filtering`	No
`effective_status`	No
`limit`	No
`auto_paginate`	No
`max_pages`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks any behavioral details such as pagination, filtering support, rate limits, or side effects. The agent is left to guess from parameter names.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short but at the expense of utility. It is not front-loaded with helpful information and fails to earn its place by providing value beyond the endpoint template.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. Critical details about return values, default behavior, and parameter semantics are absent.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no information about parameters. The agent must rely solely on parameter names and types, which is insufficient for proper invocation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'GET /act_{id}/campaigns' which indicates listing campaigns, matching the tool name and title. However, it is minimal and does not elaborate on the scope or distinguish from sibling tools like 'campaign_get' or 'adsets_list'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist for related operations, but the description provides no context for selection.

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