LinkedIn MCP Server

by oliverhruby

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

create_campaign

Create LinkedIn ad campaigns with a dry-run preview by default. Validate campaign parameters before executing changes.

Instructions

Create ad campaign. Preview by default.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "create_campaign"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`path`	No	/rest/adCampaigns
`execute`	No
`body_json`	No	{}

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Preview by default' is a useful disclosure that the default call is non-mutating, but the description omits important behavior such as authentication requirements, side effects of execute=true, and whether creation is irreversible. It is not misleading, only minimal.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no filler, and the most important behavioral caveat is front-loaded. It is concise, though it sacrifices useful usage and parameter guidance for brevity.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description is not complete enough for an agent to move from preview to actual campaign creation. It never explains how to trigger execution or populate body_json, and it gives no guidance about prerequisites or alternatives.

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 must compensate for undocumented parameters. It does not explain path, execute, or body_json, and only indirectly hints at execute=false through 'Preview by default.' An agent would not know how to structure a valid campaign creation request.

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 states 'Create ad campaign,' which identifies a specific verb and resource, and 'Preview by default' clarifies that the tool may run in a non-executing mode. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like create_campaign_group or update_campaign, but 'ad campaign' is reasonably distinct.

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?

'Preview by default' implies the default invocation is a dry run rather than an actual creation, giving some usage context. However, the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool over list_campaigns/update_campaign, nor does it state that execute=true is required to actually create a campaign.

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