Meta Ads MCP

create_campaign

Create new Meta advertising campaigns with outcome-based objectives, budget controls, and A/B testing configurations to launch targeted ads on Facebook and Instagram.

Instructions

Create a new campaign in a Meta Ads account.

Args:
    account_id: Meta Ads account ID (format: act_XXXXXXXXX)
    name: Campaign name
    objective: Campaign objective (ODAX, outcome-based). Must be one of:
               OUTCOME_AWARENESS, OUTCOME_TRAFFIC, OUTCOME_ENGAGEMENT,
               OUTCOME_LEADS, OUTCOME_SALES, OUTCOME_APP_PROMOTION.
               Note: Legacy objectives like BRAND_AWARENESS, LINK_CLICKS,
               CONVERSIONS, APP_INSTALLS, etc. are not valid for new
               campaigns and will cause a 400 error. Use the outcome-based
               values above (e.g., BRAND_AWARENESS → OUTCOME_AWARENESS).
    access_token: Meta API access token (optional - will use cached token if not provided)
    status: Initial campaign status (default: PAUSED)
    special_ad_categories: List of special ad categories if applicable
    daily_budget: Daily budget in account currency (in cents) as a string (only used if use_adset_level_budgets=False)
    lifetime_budget: Lifetime budget in account currency (in cents) as a string (only used if use_adset_level_budgets=False)
    buying_type: Buying type (e.g., 'AUCTION')
    bid_strategy: Bid strategy. Must be one of: 'LOWEST_COST_WITHOUT_CAP', 'LOWEST_COST_WITH_BID_CAP', 'COST_CAP', 'LOWEST_COST_WITH_MIN_ROAS'.
    bid_cap: Bid cap in account currency (in cents) as a string
    spend_cap: Spending limit for the campaign in account currency (in cents) as a string
    campaign_budget_optimization: Whether to enable campaign budget optimization (only used if use_adset_level_budgets=False)
    ab_test_control_setups: Settings for A/B testing (e.g., [{"name":"Creative A", "ad_format":"SINGLE_IMAGE"}])
    use_adset_level_budgets: If True, budgets will be set at the ad set level instead of campaign level (default: False)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`account_id`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`objective`	Yes
`access_token`	No
`status`	No	PAUSED
`special_ad_categories`	No
`daily_budget`	No
`lifetime_budget`	No
`buying_type`	No
`bid_strategy`	No
`bid_cap`	No
`spend_cap`	No
`campaign_budget_optimization`	No
`ab_test_control_setups`	No
`use_adset_level_budgets`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jan 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing critical behavioral traits: it warns about 400 errors for legacy objectives, explains default values (status: PAUSED), clarifies budget usage conditions, and mentions optional token caching. However, it doesn't cover rate limits, authentication requirements beyond token, or error handling details.

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 appropriately sized for a complex 15-parameter tool and front-loaded with the core purpose. The parameter explanations are necessary but somewhat dense; some formatting (like the objective list) could be more structured. Every sentence adds value, though the Args: section is lengthy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the high complexity (15 parameters, no annotations) but presence of an output schema, the description is quite complete: it covers all parameters thoroughly, explains behavioral constraints, and provides implementation guidance. The output schema likely handles return values, so the description appropriately focuses on input semantics and usage context.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed semantic information for all 15 parameters: it explains formats (e.g., 'act_XXXXXXXXX'), enumerates valid values for objective, clarifies dependencies (e.g., budget parameters only used if use_adset_level_budgets=False), and provides examples for complex parameters like ab_test_control_setups.

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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Create a new campaign') and resource ('in a Meta Ads account'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_campaign or get_campaigns. The verb+resource combination is precise and unambiguous.

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?

The description implies usage context through parameter explanations (e.g., legacy objectives cause errors) but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_campaign or create_adset. No explicit when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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