sprkly

Draft a post

sprkly_draft_post

Compose a caption from a content hint and save it as a draft in sprkly, shaped to the tightest caption limit among the target platforms. Returns a draft id; the draft appears under /drafts for the user to review.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Optional label for the draft.
`tone`	No	Voice for the draft.	casual
`platforms`	No	Intended platforms, used to pick the caption length ceiling.
`profile_ids`	No	Optional accounts to pre-select on the draft. From sprkly_list_profiles.
`content_hint`	Yes	What the post should be about: a topic, phrase, or key message.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses the main side effect (saving a draft), the return value (draft id), and the visible result (draft appears under /drafts). It adds useful behavioral detail about caption length limits, and does not contradict the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two concise sentences lead with the verb and key purpose, then specify return and review location. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a no-output-schema tool, the description explains the return value, the side effect, and the draft's visibility to users. It could mention limitations or how drafts relate to scheduling, but is otherwise sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so all five parameters are already documented. The description adds little that is not in the schema; its mention of 'tightest caption limit among the target platforms' merely paraphrases the platform parameter's schema description.

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 clearly identifies the action: compose a caption from a content hint and save it as a draft in Sprkly. It names the resource ('draft'), explains how platforms affect the caption, and distinguishes this from sibling tools like scheduling or approving posts.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The usage context is implied: the draft is saved 'for the user to review', which suggests pre-publishing workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of sprkly_schedule_post, sprkly_request_post_approval, or other siblings.

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

All sprkly tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct action and resource: media ingestion, draft creation, scheduling, deleting, updating, validation, approval, analytics, and account/profile listing. The only slight overlap is between sprkly_list_profiles and sprkly_list_scheduled_posts, but they serve clearly different purposes (target selection vs. queue view).

Naming Consistency5/5

All 16 tools follow the exact sprkly_verb_noun pattern with lowercase snake_case. Verbs are consistent (add, delete, draft, get, list, request, schedule, update, validate) and nouns are clear (media, scheduled_post, account_summary, analytics, profiles, etc.). No style mixing or vague naming.

Tool Count4/5

16 tools is slightly above the typical 3–15 sweet spot but each tool covers a distinct part of the content-scheduling lifecycle. The count feels justified given the breadth of features (media, drafts, scheduling, approvals, analytics), though a few tools could be merged (e.g., get_account_summary could be part of analytics) without much loss.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the core workflows well: draft, schedule, update, delete, approve, validate, and analyze. Minor gaps exist—there's no explicit tool to list drafts or edit a draft after submission, and no direct way to unpublish or cancel an approval—but the domain is well-served for typical scheduling needs.

Resources

Need Help?