postnitro_get_scheduled_postFetch a single scheduled post by ID, with its captions, selected social accounts, platform settings, attached design details, and publishing status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| scheduledPostId | Yes | The scheduled-post ID (get from postnitro_list_scheduled_posts) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| post | Yes | A scheduled post or draft |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The 'Fetch' language aligns with the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, and the description adds useful context about the returned fields such as captions, social accounts, platform settings, design details, and publishing status.
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 concise sentence with no redundant content, front-loading the core operation and then listing the relevant returned details.
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?
For a simple read operation with one parameter and existing annotations, the description fully captures what the tool returns and how to identify the target post. No important context is missing.
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?
The only parameter, scheduledPostId, is a required string with a clear description and a source instruction to obtain it from list_scheduled_posts. Schema coverage is complete and the description of the parameter is helpful.
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?
Clearly states it fetches a single scheduled post by ID and enumerates the returned data, distinguishing it from sibling list/create/update/delete operations.
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 parameter description explicitly tells the agent to get the ID from postnitro_list_scheduled_posts, which provides practical usage guidance. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the single-post fetch intent is clear.
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 are clearly separated by verb and noun (generate_carousel vs generate_image vs generate_video, import_* vs generate_*). The generic convenience names like generate_and_wait and import_and_wait are slightly ambiguous, but their descriptions and the _wait/_schedule suffixes make them distinguishable.
All tools share the postnitro_ prefix and snake_case verb-first convention. A few compound names (generate_and_schedule, import_and_wait) break the strict verb_noun pattern, but the convention is otherwise consistent and predictable.
With 35 tools, the surface exceeds the rubric's 25+ 'too many' threshold. Many entries are convenience wrappers (_wait, _and_schedule) around the same core operations and could be consolidated to reduce overload.
The domain is well covered: generation, import, output retrieval, scheduling, brands, social accounts, audio, templates, presets, and defaults. Minor gaps remain (no delete_brand, no upload/connect for audio/social accounts), but those are largely external or non-critical.