​

Competitor API Naming Convention Analysis

​

Executive Summary

1. CreatorDB’s camelCase convention is defensible. While 3 of 4 competitor API surfaces use snake_case, the snake_case majority comes from Python-origin APIs. camelCase aligns with the JS/TS ecosystem and Modash’s Discovery API. Switching would be a massive breaking change with no clear developer experience benefit.
2. Instagram’s username field for display name is the most urgent fix. Every competitor with data uses username to mean “handle.” CreatorDB Instagram uses it to mean “display name” — the opposite meaning. This will confuse any developer who has used a competitor API. Rename to displayName to match YouTube.
3. The sponsoredContent vs sponsorList inconsistency must be resolved before fractional calls ship. YouTube pricing reference uses sponsoredContent[] while Instagram uses sponsorList[] for the same concept. Standardize on sponsorList (Instagram’s term) since it better describes the brand-grouped array structure.
4. CreatorDB’s per-content vs. aggregate engagement rate distinction is a differentiator, not a problem. Competitors use a single engagementRate term because they do not expose both levels. CreatorDB’s engagementRate (per-content) / avgEngagementRate (aggregate) dual convention is more precise and should be kept.
5. Audience authenticity and brand safety are feature gaps. HypeAuditor offers audience_type (real/suspicious/influencer/mass follower breakdown) and brand_safety.score. Modash offers audienceCredibility. CreatorDB has no equivalent. This is a product gap, not a naming issue, but it surfaced during analysis.

​

Sources

​

Feature Coverage Comparison

​

Key Naming Observations

​

Where CreatorDB aligns with industry

• Follower/subscriber terms: Platform-specific terms match 2 of 3 competitors.
• Verified status: isVerified is universal (casing aside).
• Audience field names: audienceLocations, audienceGender, audienceAgeBreakdown are clear and competitive with HypeAuditor’s equivalents.
• Bio: Simple bio field is clear (HypeAuditor uses about, which is equally clear).

​

Where CreatorDB deviates from industry

• Display name (IG): username means “handle” in every competitor API. CreatorDB IG uses it for display name. This is the single most confusing deviation.
• Handle naming: uniqueId and userId do not communicate “handle.” Competitors use username or platform_username. However, these are also query params, making changes expensive.
• Sponsorship array naming: Internal inconsistency (sponsoredContent vs sponsorList) is more pressing than competitor alignment.

​

Where CreatorDB exceeds competitors

• Engagement precision: Dual engagementRate / avgEngagementRate convention is unique and valuable.
• Per-follower ratios: likesPerSubscriber, viewsPerSubscriber etc. are not offered by any competitor.
• Engagement consistency: engagementConsistency object with cv, medianVsMean, topBottomRatio, consistencyScore is a significant differentiator.
• Content-type granularity: Separate performance objects for videos vs. shorts (YT) and images vs. reels (IG) is more detailed than any competitor.

​

Recommended Actions (Prioritized)

​

Priority 1: Fix before fractional calls ship

​

Priority 2: Plan deprecation cycle

​

Priority 3: Document and defer

​

Priority 4: Product roadmap consideration (not naming)

​

Confidence Levels Summary

• HypeAuditor analysis: HIGH confidence. Full schema from public API documentation. All field paths verified.
• Modash analysis: MEDIUM confidence. Discovery API field names confirmed from multiple sources. Raw API and deeper schemas are behind auth.
• Phyllo analysis: MEDIUM confidence. Core identity/count fields confirmed. Audience/content schemas require account access.
• Influencers.club: LOW confidence. Excluded from field-level analysis. Only marketing claims available.
• Traackr: LOW confidence. Excluded from field-level analysis. API docs fully gated.

​

Detailed Deliverables