Skip to main content
Glama

Get webmaster by id

get_webmaster
Read-only

Fetch a single webmaster (affiliate NETWORK) by UUID: aggregate stats PLUS top_creatives — the creatives this webmaster re-uploads the MOST, ordered by the webmaster's OWN in-slice ad count (slice.ads_in_slice desc — the deliberate slice order, matching what the profile page shows), media stripped/free. Each entry's total_ads is the creative's market-wide family size, folded best-effort from family redirects and floored at ads_in_slice — total_ads == ads_in_slice therefore often means 'family cards not yet built', not 'this webmaster owns the whole market'; it is context, not the sort key. analytics_pending=true means the canonical PostgreSQL identity exists but its ClickHouse aggregate is not published yet, so zero counters are not analytical zeroes. fanpages_status explicitly reports advertiser-aligned lifecycle enrichment as available, partial, unavailable or not_applicable; an omitted fanpages array is therefore never evidence that a page is alive. The id MUST be the canonical UUID returned by search_webmasters; domain names and display names are rejected instead of silently widening to the whole database. Present top_creatives as the headline final step; for the rest of the network use search_creatives?webmaster_id / search_ads?webmaster_id, and download media with get_media (entity_type=creo). identifier_inventory_semantics explains why historical page/domain/pixel inventory counts are not comparable to total_ads. attribution_link_stats.merge_edges answers WHY these identifiers sit in one network: each entry is a {page_id, page_name, domain, ads} pair — that fanpage ran exactly that many ads on that landing domain, and such a pair is what merges two networks into one (an ad whose domain belongs to network A and whose fanpage belongs to network B fuses them permanently). Weigh the edges before claiming a single operator: a 1-3 ad edge next to 100+ ad edges is a thin bridge, typically a catalog/feed ad, and is weak evidence of shared ownership; identifiers with no edge at all are inherited from earlier merges and prove nothing today. QUOTA: 1 token (one entity card). TIKTOK: with source=tiktok this fetches the TikTok cluster card instead (business-id rollup, same UUID space as search_webmasters source=tiktok results) — ⚠️ costs 100 tokens and requires a Pro-or-higher plan; the Meta-only embeds (top_creatives, attribution link-stats) are omitted on the TikTok card.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesthe webmaster UUID (from search_webmasters — same id space for both corpora)
sourceNowebmaster corpus: meta (default, FREE) or tiktok (⚠️ 100 tokens for the TikTok cluster card; Pro plan required)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: top_creatives ordering semantics, total_ads interpretation as market-wide family size, analytics_pending meaning, fanpages_status nuance, strict UUID rejection, TikTok token cost and Pro-plan requirement, and edge-weighting caveats for attribution merge edges. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 long but densely packed, with every sentence carrying a distinct operational warning or semantic clarification. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and uses recognizable labels like QUOTA and TIKTOK to structure auxiliary details. Nothing reads as filler or tautology.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with intricate output semantics, the description is remarkably complete: it explains ambiguous fields, quota costs, plan requirements, source variants, and interpretation pitfalls. The presence of an output schema covers the raw return shape, while the description covers the semantics that the schema cannot express.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that id must be the canonical UUID from search_webmasters and that domain names/display names are rejected. Source semantics are already in the schema enum description, so the added parameter insight is limited but meaningful.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a single webmaster (affiliate NETWORK) by UUID: aggregate stats PLUS top_creatives'. It clearly identifies what the tool returns and distinguishes it from sibling search tools by emphasizing single-entity retrieval by canonical UUID. The TikTok variant is also explicitly differentiated.

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?

The description gives explicit routing guidance: use this tool for a single webmaster card, use search_creatives/search_ads for the rest of the network, and get_media for downloading creatives. It also states a hard precondition: the id must be the canonical UUID from search_webmasters, with domain/display names rejected. This leaves no ambiguity about when to invoke this tool versus alternatives.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.