Asset group reporting has improved - is it finally enough to act on?

Revisiting this because the reporting is genuinely better than it was two years ago and I want to work out whether my scepticism is still earned or just habit. What I can see now, per asset group: spend, conversions, and enough of a breakdown to tell which group is carrying the campaign. That's a real improvement over one blended number. What I still can't see, and what I think decides whether this is actionable: Which individual asset is doing the work, beyond a performance label that groups things into broad bands without telling me the comparison it made. Which placements the spend went to, so I can tell whether a group is being carried by search intent or by cheap display impressions that happen to be attached to it. My tentative conclusion is that the reporting is now good enough to reallocate budget between asset groups, and still not good enough to improve an asset group. Which is progress, and it is a lower ceiling than the interface implies. Has anyone found a way to get the placement breakdown out of it? That's the missing piece for me and I suspect the answer is a script.