get_ad_accountRetrieve the configured OpenAI Ads account details including ID, name, destination URL, timezone, currency, and brand review status for verification or audits.
Fetches the OpenAI Ads account associated with the configured API key, including ID, name, destination URL, timezone, currency, and brand review status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Fetches' clearly signals a read-only operation, and the listed return fields provide concrete expectations. It does not discuss error cases or rate limits, but for a simple getter these omissions are minor.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, tight sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then enumerates the returned metadata fields. There is no redundant detail or filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a low-complexity, zero-parameter tool with no output schema. The description covers what the tool returns and how the account is identified, which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it confidently.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to add. The baseline of 4 applies because nothing is missing on this front.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific verb ('Fetches'), a resource ('the OpenAI Ads account'), and the scope ('associated with the configured API key'). It is distinct from sibling tools like update_ad_account_brand, though it does not explicitly name or contrast itself with any sibling.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied: use this tool when you need the ad account metadata for the configured API key. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, but with zero parameters and a unique resource, the intended context is reasonably clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.