PostRite

Hide or unhide a comment

set_comment_hidden

Idempotent

Hide a comment on the network (people other than its author stop seeing it) or unhide it. Reversible. Refused, with the reason, when actions.canHide is false — e.g. OWN_COMMENT_CANNOT_HIDE (an account cannot hide its own comment), NOT_OWN_MEDIA (a mention on someone else's post), PLATFORM_DENIED. Unhiding a comment an auto-moderation rule hid stops every rule from hiding it again. Needs the organization's "Let AI assistants answer comments and messages" setting (owner-only; without it the api answers MCP_INBOX_DISABLED) and a connection authorized with the comments/chat permissions — one authorized before they existed must reconnect, and a client that kept its own registration from before then must remove PostRite and add it again.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "commentId": "<commentId>",
      "hidden": "<hidden>"
    },
    "name": "set_comment_hidden"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hidden`	Yes	true hides, false unhides
`commentId`	Yes	Comment ID from list_comments
`organizationId`	No	Organization to act in — an id from list_organizations. Required when this connection was authorized for more than one organization; omit it when there is only one.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`comment`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the generic safety profile (reversible-looking write, idempotent, not destructive); the description adds substantive behavior well beyond them: the exact visibility semantics, error codes on refusal, the durable side effect that unhiding stops all auto-moderation rules from re-hiding, the owner-only org setting gate (MCP_INBOX_DISABLED), and the permission/reconnect requirement when the connection predates the comments scope.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the action and its visibility effect, then layers constraints and failure modes in a logical order. It is dense and parenthesis-heavy, and the reconnect/add-again instructions are a long tail for an edge case, but the information is not padding.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description covers what an agent must know before calling: reversibility, the three-parameter contract's intent, auth and org-setting prerequisites, and the specific failure modes. Nothing material is missing for a reversible mutation of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and already defines hidden ('true hides, false unhides'), commentId's source (list_comments), and organizationId's multi-org rule, so the description adds essentially nothing new about parameters. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the full burden.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Hide a comment on the network ... or unhide it') and immediately defines the observable effect ('people other than its author stop seeing it'), which distinguishes it from delete_comment and set_comment_status without opening their schemas.

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?

Gives clear when-not conditions via named refusal reasons (OWN_COMMENT_CANNOT_HIDE, NOT_OWN_MEDIA, PLATFORM_DENIED) and prerequisites for use, plus one important caveat about unhiding auto-moderation-hidden comments. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent to a sibling (e.g. delete_comment or set_comment_status) when hiding is not what's wanted.

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

All PostRite tools Inspect

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

Need Help?