GenFlick

Manage brand sources

native.identity_brand_source

DestructiveIdempotent

Read effective direction and locations, or choose one source brand and explicit inherited fields for this owned brand. Read current settings revision first. Linked brands never merge implicitly; saved local fields remain available when inheritance is disabled.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.identity_brand_source"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`work_id`	Yes
`arguments`	Yes
`read_skills`	Yes	Exact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
`request_key`	Yes
`publication_proposal_id`	No	For native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
`expected_catalog_version`	Yes	For a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description adds real context not available there: linked brands never merge implicitly, and locally saved fields survive when inheritance is disabled. It still does not say what the destructive save overwrites (e.g. whether previously inherited values are replaced) or what the read returns, which is the key risk for a destructiveHint=true tool.

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?

Three tight sentences with the read path and the prerequisite front-loaded; nothing is redundant relative to what is stated. It is dense to the point of being cryptic in places, but no sentence is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a six-parameter nested tool with an output schema, the description covers the two operations and one safety caveat, which is a reasonable core. It omits the session/identity prerequisites embodied by read_skills and expected_catalog_version and does not map enum field names to behavior, so an agent is still partly reliant on the schema.

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 50%, so the description should compensate. It hints at expected_revision ('read current settings revision first') and at source_brand_id/fields ('choose one source brand and explicit inherited fields'), but never mentions the required work_id, request_key, or read_skills parameters, leaving half the surface to the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names two distinct actions (read effective direction and locations; choose a source brand plus inherited fields) for a brand-source resource, which is more than a restatement of the title. However, the framing is heavily jargonized ('effective direction', 'explicit inherited fields') and never uses the schema's actual operation names (read/save), so it is hard to distinguish at a glance from siblings like native.identity_portfolio or native.save_studio_identity.

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?

'Read current settings revision first' gives a concrete prerequisite ordering for the save path, and the linked-brand caveat implies when inheritance behavior applies. There is no explicit statement of when to pick this tool over the several adjacent identity tools, and no when-not guidance.

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

All GenFlick 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?