Skip to main content
Glama

Shager

by ai.shager
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

See the whole account: clients, accounts and groups

get_structure
Read-onlyIdempotent

How a Shager account is organized:

  • Organization: the whole account, with one plan and one team. Your key belongs to exactly one organization.

  • Workspaces: inside the organization. In the app a workspace is called a client when the organization is an agency (one workspace per client business) and a brand or simply "my accounts" when a person or business posts for itself (usually one workspace). Everything below lives inside one workspace and never crosses into another.

    • Channels: the connected social accounts of that workspace — one Facebook Page, one Instagram account, one YouTube channel, one X account, one LinkedIn profile or company Page, one TikTok account, one Bluesky account, one Telegram channel, one Mastodon account, one Threads profile, one Pinterest business account, one Google Business Profile location each. A channel belongs to exactly one workspace.

    • Groups: named sets of that workspace's channels (for example "Hebrew pages" or "North branches"). A channel can be in several groups or in none. Targeting a group posts to all of its ACTIVE channels.

    • Media, posts, tracked links, webhooks and the client-approval setting also belong to the workspace.

  • A post belongs to one workspace and targets channel_ids and/or group_ids from that same workspace. Call get_structure (GET /structure) to see the whole tree in one call: every workspace with its channels and groups. When you talk to the person, use their words: "client" (agency) or "your accounts" (one business), and "group".

Returns the organization, then every workspace (client or brand) with its connected channels and its groups (each group lists its channel_ids; each channel lists the groups it is in). Use it before posting to pick the right workspace, channel_ids and group_ids.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context about the returned hierarchy and workspace isolation, though it does not discuss auth, rate limits, or pagination.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured with bullets, but it is long and front-loads a domain-model explanation before stating the tool action. Much of the hierarchy detail is useful, yet the core purpose could be stated more concisely and earlier.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining what is returned. It does so clearly: the organization, every workspace, each workspace's channels and groups, and the channel/group relationships needed for posting.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4, and nothing in the description undermines that.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action and resource: call get_structure to see the whole tree of workspaces, channels, and groups in one call. It implies differentiation from sibling list tools by emphasizing the whole tree in one call, but it does not explicitly name alternatives like list_workspaces or list_groups.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives a clear usage context: use it before posting to pick the right workspace, channel_ids, and group_ids. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name sibling alternatives, so the guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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

All Shager toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources