UGC Agent

List UGC Brands

list_ugc_brands

Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse the curated UGC Brands database: brands that run UGC creator programs, with program facts (pay per video with its sources in program.pay, program hashtags, markets), 30-day KPIs (accounts, videos, views, estimated payouts) and all-time views (summary.views_total). Use it when the user asks how a known brand runs its UGC program or wants programs to copy; use research_company for brands not listed. Free, any plan.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`uid`	No	Optional Firebase uid. Must match the URL uid unless local fallback is enabled.
`sort`	No	views_total = all-time views.
`limit`	No	Page size, 1-100 (default 25).
`query`	No	Matches brand name, domain or category.
`sizes`	No	Program size by accounts: s 1-10, m 11-50, l 51-200, xl 201+.
`cursor`	No	The next_cursor from the previous page. Keep the other filters identical.
`markets`	No	ISO-2 country codes of the brand's top creator countries.
`pay_rate`	No
`platforms`	No
`categories`	No
`bearer_token`	No	Optional Firebase ID token. Hosted clients normally authenticate with an API key header or ?uid= in the URL instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 31, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / sort / description
```
Added value: +"views_total = all-time views."
```

changedInput schema / properties / sort / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "views_30d",
-  "accounts",
-  "brand_videos_30d",
-  "name"
-]New value: +[
+  "views_30d",
+  "views_total",
+  "accounts",
+  "brand_videos_30d",
+  "name"
+]

First observedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by noting the database is curated and free on any plan, which clarifies scope and access. It does not describe pagination or rate-limit behavior, so it is not fully comprehensive.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then gives usage guidance, then access/pricing context. It is compact and every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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?

For an 11-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description explains what is returned at a useful level: program facts, 30-day KPIs, and all-time views. It also covers usage and alternatives, though it leaves pagination and filter behavior to the schema and annotations.

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 73%, and the schema already documents most filters and enums. The description mentions markets and all-time views in the return data, but does not add input-filter semantics for query, sort, sizes, platforms, categories, pay_rate, cursor, or pagination. Its parameter-level value is therefore adequate but not compensating for the remaining coverage 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 states a specific action and resource: browse the curated UGC Brands database. It clarifies the domain (brands that run UGC creator programs) and the returned facts (program.pay, hashtags, markets, KPIs, all-time views). It also distinguishes this tool from research_company for brands not listed.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says when to use it: when the user asks how a known brand runs its UGC program or wants programs to copy. It also names research_company as the alternative for brands not in the curated database, giving a clear when-not condition.

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

All UGC Agent tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?