PostRite

Update a conversation

update_conversation

Idempotent

Mark a conversation read, close or reopen it, snooze it, or pause its automations — PostRite's inbox state, nothing is sent to the contact. 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": {
      "conversationId": "<conversationId>"
    },
    "name": "update_conversation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	No	CLOSED when handled, OPEN to reopen, SNOOZED with snoozedUntil
`markRead`	No	true clears its unread count
`snoozedUntil`	No	With status SNOOZED: when it comes back (ISO 8601; an offset is converted to UTC)
`conversationId`	Yes	Conversation ID from list_conversations
`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.
`isAutomationPaused`	No	true stops automations from answering in this conversation

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`conversation`	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 already declare mutation, idempotency and open-world reach, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the owner-only dependency on the AI-assistant setting, the MCP_INBOX_DISABLED error that results when it is off, the required permission scope, and the fact that stale authorizations must be reconnected or re-registered. It also states the reassuring behavioral fact that no message is sent to the contact.

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?

The action list is front-loaded and the second sentence consolidates prerequisites efficiently. The re-registration detail is operational but somewhat dense and buried, costing a bit of scannability.

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?

With an output schema, full parameter documentation and annotations present, the description supplies exactly the missing layer: permissions, org-level feature gating, the specific failure code, and the no-contact-side-effect guarantee. An agent has everything needed to call it and to diagnose a likely failure.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter already carries its own description, including the SNOOZED/snoozedUntil coupling and the organizationId multi-org rule. The description's enumeration of actions loosely maps to status, markRead, snoozedUntil and isAutomationPaused but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource and enumerates the exact state changes (mark read, close, reopen, snooze, pause automations), which distinguishes it from read-only siblings such as get_conversation_messages and list_conversations. It also scopes what the tool is not: PostRite inbox state only, nothing sent to the contact.

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 clear conditions for use (inbox state changes, not messaging) and detailed prerequisites: the owner-only org setting, the comments/chat permission scope, and reconnect/re-register steps. It does not explicitly route the agent to alternatives (e.g. send_message for replying, set_comment_status for comments), so routing is inferred rather than stated.

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?