microsoft-ads-mcp

get_website_exclusions

Read-only

Retrieve the list of websites and mobile app IDs excluded from a campaign to prevent ads from serving on specified sites.

Instructions

List the website / mobile-app-id exclusions (negative sites) blocked on a campaign.

These prevent ads from serving on the listed sites/apps. Add or remove them with add_website_exclusions / remove_website_exclusions.

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": {
      "campaign_id": "<campaign_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_website_exclusions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`campaign_id`	Yes	The campaign id.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`urls`	No
`count`	No
`campaign_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds context about the nature of exclusions (negative sites) and their effect, enhancing transparency without contradicting annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences: first defines purpose, second adds context and sibling tools. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Simple tool with one parameter and output schema exist. Description fully covers purpose, usage context, and relationship to siblings, leaving no gaps.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter campaign_id, so baseline is 3. Description does not add additional parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'website / mobile-app-id exclusions (negative sites) blocked on a campaign', distinguishing it from sibling tools add/remove_website_exclusions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly explains that exclusions prevent ads from serving and directs users to add_website_exclusions/remove_website_exclusions for modifications, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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

Deploy Server