List posts in the workspace with optional filters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum posts to return. Defaults to 20 and is capped at 50. | |
| runId | No | ||
| offset | No | Offset for paging through results. | |
| status | No | e.g. scheduled, published, action_required, failed, canceled. | |
| account | No | Account handle filter. | |
| provider | No | ||
| campaignId | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / status / descriptionPrevious value: -"e.g. scheduled, published, failed, canceled."New value: +"e.g. scheduled, published, action_required, failed, canceled."Input schema / properties / limit / descriptionAdded value: +"Maximum posts to return. Defaults to 20 and is capped at 50."Input schema / properties / offsetAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Offset for paging through results.",
+ "type": "number"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function and does not reveal pagination behavior, default limits, output format, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a list operation with 7 parameters.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It clearly conveys the primary action and scope, making it an appropriate length for the tool's purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 7 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain return values, pagination, filtering specifics, or relationship to sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand its behavior.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 57%, and the description merely says 'optional filters' without enumerating or explaining any parameters. It adds no semantic value beyond the schema, and leaves undocumented parameters (runId, provider, campaignId) entirely unexplained.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('posts'), scoped to 'the workspace' with 'optional filters'. This sufficiently distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_post (singular post) and list_accounts (accounts).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, such as get_post or list_accounts. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or preferred scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few are close: delete_instagram_comment vs hide_instagram_comment overlap (though one is preferred), and get_analytics overlaps with Instagram-specific analytics tools. Overall, the boundaries are generally clear, with only minor potential confusion.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_accounts, connect_account, upload_asset, cancel_post). There are no deviations in style or grammar, making the naming highly predictable.
With 31 tools, this exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many'. While the broad multi-provider social media domain justifies some breadth, the sheer number makes the surface heavy and potentially overwhelming, pushing the score down.
The tool set covers core workflows well: account connection, scheduling/publishing, post management, analytics, Instagram-specific engagement (comments, messages), asset upload, and workspace health/usage. Minor gaps include no explicit disconnect_account or delete_post, but these are edge cases; the domain is largely covered.