Skip to main content
Glama

SendIt

by io.github.Shree-git

Duplicate Scheduled Post

duplicate_scheduled_post

Create a new scheduled post by duplicating an existing scheduled post. If no time is supplied, SendIt shifts it forward automatically.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoCompatibility alias for postId.
postIdNoScheduled post ID.
team_idNoTeam ID to operate in team scope. Get available teams with list_teams. If omitted, uses personal scope.
scheduleIdNoCompatibility alias for postId.
scheduledAtNoOptional ISO 8601 time for the duplicated post.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "postId"
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "scheduleId"
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "id"
-    ]
-  }
-]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, indicating a mutating operation with potential side effects. The description adds one behavioral trait: if no time is supplied, the post is automatically shifted forward. However, it does not explain what 'shifted forward' means (e.g., to next available slot), what fields are copied, or whether the new post requires re-approval. This adds some context but is not comprehensive given openWorldHint=true.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a concise edge-case note. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or 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?

Given five parameters, zero required, no output schema, and openWorldHint=true, the description is minimal. It covers the core duplication action and the auto-shift behavior, but leaves gaps: how far forward it shifts, whether all post attributes are duplicated, whether a new post ID is generated, and side effects like approval flows. The annotations cover safety (mutation, non-idempotent), so the description does not need to repeat that, but it could provide more operational context.

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%, with each parameter having a description. The description adds meaningful semantics for scheduledAt by explaining the behavior when it is omitted (auto-shift forward), which is not in the schema. It does not describe the alias relationships (id, scheduleId) but those are already covered by the schema. The description thus adds value beyond the structured fields.

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 action: 'Create a new scheduled post by duplicating an existing scheduled post.' This clearly identifies the resource (scheduled post) and the operation (duplicate), distinguishing it from siblings like edit_scheduled_post or retry_scheduled_post. The verb and resource are unambiguous.

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?

The description implies the use case—duplicating an existing scheduled post—but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., edit_scheduled_post, retry_scheduled_post, schedule_content). The note about auto-shifting when no time is supplied gives some scheduling context, but no exclusions or alternative references are provided. Usage is thus implied rather than explicitly directed.

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

All SendIt toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

With 148 tools, there is significant overlap. For example, generate_content, publish_ai, generate_post_bundle, and request_project_content all generate content; get_analytics, get_unified_analytics, get_post_analytics, get_ad_performance, and get_unified_ad_report all fetch performance metrics; and list_inbox vs list_conversations blur comment and conversation management. Descriptions help, but boundaries between tools are often unclear.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_teams, create_goal, delete_post), but there are notable deviations: create_library_item vs save_to_library, publish_content vs publish_ai, schedule_content vs schedule_content_advanced, and connect_platform vs connect_connector. Mixed prefixes like 'autopilot_', 'check_', and 'get_' are fine, but overlapping verbs and a hyphen in 'connect_linkedin-page' reduce consistency.

Tool Count1/5

148 tools is extreme for any server. Even for a broad social media management platform, this is far beyond what an agent can effectively navigate. The count is unwieldy and suggests the surface should be split into multiple focused servers (publishing, analytics, connectors, workflows, etc.).

Completeness3/5

The core social publishing workflow is well covered (create, schedule, publish, edit, delete, retry), and there are extensive features for analytics, workflows, connectors, and AI agents. However, some resources have CRUD gaps: no update/delete for brand voices, no delete_project, no update/delete for Product Hunt goals, and no explicit get_workflow. These are workable but notable omissions.

Resources