LeanrIQ

Collect brand logos, imagery, colours, fonts, and visual previews for use in Studio creative builds. Use this before build_ad when a campaign needs visual grounding; this read capability does not save to Studio.

get_brand_visuals

Read-onlyIdempotent

Collect brand logos, imagery, colours, fonts, and visual previews for use in Studio creative builds. Use this before build_ad when a campaign needs visual grounding; this read capability does not save to Studio.. Classification: read-only. Execution: synchronous. Task support: forbidden. The returned JSON is internal application state for LeanrIQ and ChatGPT orchestration. Use assistantSummary first when responding to the user. Never display raw JSON, data, or meta unless the user explicitly asks for raw JSON. Mention IDs only when useful for follow-up or debugging. Prefer concise, human language, highlight the most useful insight, and suggest the next best LeanrIQ action.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`seatId`	No
`options`	No
`storage`	No
`seatName`	No
`brandName`	Yes
`websiteUrl`	Yes
`advertiserId`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`meta`	Yes
`error`	No
`status`	Yes
`assistantSummary`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / options / properties / fetchVideos
```
Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

addedInput schema / properties / options / properties / maxSocialImages

Added value: +{
+  "default": 10,
+  "maximum": 40,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / options / properties / maxVideos

Added value: +{
+  "default": 12,
+  "maximum": 30,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

First observedAug 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already assert read-only/idempotent/non-destructive; the description adds 'Execution: synchronous,' 'Task support: forbidden,' and a clear statement that returned JSON is internal application state not meant for raw display. It also prescribes assistantSummary-first and concise human-language responses. This provides meaningful behavior context beyond the annotations, though it doesn't cover operational details like auth or rate limits.

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?

Purpose and usage are front-loaded and the sentences are terse. The later presentation rules add real guidance but make the description a bit dense, and 'Classification: read-only' partially duplicates annotations. Overall it's structured and information-dense with little waste.

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?

The tool is complex (7 params, nested options with many fields, 0% schema coverage) and the description doesn't explain how to set or choose those inputs. The output schema covers return shape, but for invocation the description is incomplete.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description provides no parameter-level guidance. An agent gets no help understanding required advertiserId, brandName, websiteURL, or the nested options/storage objects. With seven parameters and a large options object, this is a serious gap.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Collect brand logos, imagery, colours, fonts, and visual previews.' It also explicitly positions the tool 'before build_ad' and states it is a read capability that does not save to Studio, which distinguishes it from the write/build siblings. The purpose is clear and actionable.

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 a concrete usage context: 'Use this before build_ad when a campaign needs visual grounding' and clarifies it does not save to Studio. What's missing is explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives like get_brand_profile or refresh_brand_visuals, so it doesn't reach a full 5.

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

All LeanrIQ tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

The tool set is dominated by deprecated aliases (leanriq_build_ad, leanriq_create_brief, etc.) that duplicate canonical tools exactly, and multiple high-level builders (build_ad, build_campaign_creative_set, leanriq_campaign_builder, launch_creative_campaign) overlap in purpose. An agent would struggle to pick the intended tool without inspecting full descriptions.

Naming Consistency2/5

Canonical tools follow a sensible verb_noun pattern (create_campaign, get_creative, list_flights), but the large number of 'leanriq_' prefixed aliases and special names like leanriq_campaign_builder create a mixed, inconsistent surface. The presence of both build_ad and leanriq_build_ad, or get_current_seat and leanriq_current_seat, breaks any predictable convention.

Tool Count1/5

87 tools is an extreme number for any MCP server, even a broad ad-platform API. The sheer volume, including many duplicate aliases, far exceeds a well-scoped set and will overwhelm agents with unnecessary choices.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is well covered: CRUD for advertisers, campaigns, flights, creatives, versions, assets, plus trafficking, QA, preview, and publishing. Minor gaps exist, such as the missing canonical create_creative_strategy (only a deprecated alias references it) and no direct update_creative, but the domain is functionally complete.

Resources

Need Help?