tie-mcp-server

get_ad_object_by_infrastructure

Fetches a specific ad object instance using its unique identifier, infrastructure ID, and directory ID.

Instructions

Get ad-object instance by id.

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": {
      "infrastructureId": "<infrastructureId>",
      "directoryId": "<directoryId>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_ad_object_by_infrastructure"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Path parameter: id
`directoryId`	Yes	Path parameter: directoryId
`infrastructureId`	Yes	Path parameter: infrastructureId

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'get' without mentioning read-only nature, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and efficient. It contains no unnecessary words, but could be expanded to add value.

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?

Given three required parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools for retrieving ad-objects, the description is incomplete. It does not describe return values, error conditions, or when to use this specific variant.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain how the three ID parameters relate or their roles in identifying the ad-object.

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 ad-object instance by id' which provides a verb and resource but lacks specificity on how it differs from siblings like get_ad_object_by_checker or get_ad_object_by_directory. It does not mention the infrastructure context implied by the tool name, leaving purpose vague.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not differentiate based on the infrastructure parameter, nor does it explain prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server