UGC Agent

List Winning UGC Ads

list_winning_ads

Read-onlyIdempotent

Winning UGC ads from the Meta Ad Library: creator-style ads that brands in the UGC Brands database kept paying to run, a strong sign the ad converts. tier=winner ran longest with the most copies, proven has a solid run; each ad has the reasons it qualified, run_days, copies, impressions rank, the creator, ad copy (body), poster/preview/video URLs, the Ad Library link and labels (niche, language, format, on_camera; may be null). Use it for proven hooks and formats to brief creators on. Pro sees a teaser and locked counts the rest, which unlock on Premium. Free.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_winning_ads"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`uid`	No	Optional Firebase uid. Must match the URL uid unless local fallback is enabled.
`brand`	No	Optional brand id from list_ugc_brands, to see one brand only. Omit for every brand.
`limit`	No	Page size, 1-200 (default 50).
`cursor`	No	The next_cursor from the previous page. Keep the other filters identical.
`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.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: defines what tier=winner vs proven actually mean in terms of run length and copies, lists the qualification reasons and returned fields, and discloses the Pro teaser plus `locked` count that unlocks on Premium. That paywall behavior is exactly the kind of gating an agent needs to know before calling.

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?

Front-loads the resource definition and tier semantics before the output fields, with no filler sentences. Some clauses are packed with comma-separated field lists, which is dense but still scannable.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating run_days, copies, impressions rank, creator, ad copy, asset URLs, Ad Library link, and labels. Pagination is left to the cursor/limit schema fields, and the brand-filter workflow is partially covered by the schema's reference to list_ugc_brands.

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 all five parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description adds no syntax or format guidance for uid, brand, limit, or cursor. It does reference tier values, which are data fields rather than request parameters, so it contributes little parameter-level meaning.

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?

Opens with a specific verb-and-resource statement: winning UGC-style ads from the Meta Ad Library that brands kept paying to run. It also implicitly separates itself from list_winning_videos by framing the unit as creator-style ads with hooks and formats, though it never names the sibling directly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides a use case ('for proven hooks and formats to brief creators on') which implies when to reach for it, but gives no exclusions or explicit alternatives (e.g., when to use search_ugc_database or list_winning_videos instead). Usage is implied rather than routed.

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?