Facebook Ad Library MCP

Search the Ad Library

search_ads

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Meta's public Ad Library by keyword or advertiser page ID to retrieve ad copy, creatives, destinations, platforms, and run dates.

Instructions

Search Meta's public Ad Library by keyword, or list every ad from one advertiser by passing page_id. Returns advertiser, copy, creative count, destination domain, call to action, platforms and how long each ad has run. Works for ordinary commercial advertisers in any country. Spend and reach are null outside the EU, which is correct rather than a failure: that data is only published for EU and political ads.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	How many ads to return. On the browser backend a higher number costs more time.
`query`	No	Keyword: a brand, product or angle. Optional if page_id is given.
`ad_type`	No	Ad category. 'all' covers ordinary commercial ads and is what you usually want.
`country`	No	Two-letter country the ads were delivered in, e.g. US, GB, DE. Default US.
`page_id`	No	Advertiser Page ID. Returns that Page's ads instead of a keyword search. Use list_advertisers first if you only know the brand name.
`media_type`	No	Filter by creative type. 'meme' is Meta's name for an image with text on it.
`active_status`	No	Only ads running now, only stopped ads, or both. Default active.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ads`	Yes
`url`	No
`note`	No
`count`	Yes
`cursor`	No
`backend`	Yes
`has_more`	Yes
`total_available`	No	Meta's own count of matching ads.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.6.1Oct 6, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedOutput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
First observedv0.4.0Sep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the description's real contribution is behavioral: it lists what comes back (advertiser, copy, creative count, domain, CTA, platforms, run duration) and preempts a likely misinterpretation by explaining that null spend/reach outside the EU is expected, not an error. That is genuinely additive context beyond the 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?

Three sentences, zero padding, with the core capability front-loaded and the EU-data caveat placed at the end where it serves as a footnote. Every sentence carries information an agent needs.

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?

For a read-only search tool with a full input schema, output schema, and complete annotations, the description supplies the missing pieces: the two search modes, the returned field set, and the EU spend/reach caveat. Nothing needed to call it correctly is absent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters, including enum values and defaults. The description reinforces the query/page_id mode split but adds no syntax, format, or default detail beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Search Meta's public Ad Library') and cleanly separates its two invocation modes: keyword search versus listing all ads for one advertiser via page_id. It stops short of differentiating itself from siblings like get_ad or list_advertisers, so it is clear but not fully sibling-aware.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear context for choosing between the two modes ('by keyword, or ... by passing page_id') and states the domain of applicability ('ordinary commercial advertisers in any country'). There is no explicit when-not guidance or pointer to alternative tools, which keeps it below a 5.

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

Deploy Server