Misar.Blog MCP Server

Create a draft

create_draft

Save an article as an unpublished draft.

Nothing becomes visible to readers: use this whenever the work still needs review, and publish_article only when it should go live. The draft can be edited afterwards with update_article.

Each call creates a NEW draft — not idempotent, so calling twice leaves two drafts. Requires an API key. Returns the draft with an editor_url for finishing it in the browser.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	Topic tags to carry through to publication.
`title`	Yes	Working headline. Can be changed before publishing.
`body_markdown`	Yes	Article body so far, as Markdown.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (non-idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses the API key requirement, the fact that each call creates a new draft (elaborating on idempotentHint), and the return value including editor_url. This adds useful context beyond the structured data.

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?

The description is concise yet complete, with three short paragraphs. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value without fluff.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description mentions the return format (draft with editor_url). Combined with schema and annotations, it covers purpose, usage, non-idempotency, auth, and response, making it fully contextual for an AI agent.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description does not add further parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Save an article as an unpublished draft') and clearly differentiates from siblings by contrasting with publish_article and update_article. It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use guidance is provided: 'use this whenever the work still needs review, and publish_article only when it should go live.' It also notes the draft can be edited with update_article, giving clear alternatives and exclusions.

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

All Misar.Blog MCP Server 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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools mostly map to clearly distinct resources and actions, with good behavioral separation between create_draft, publish_article, and update_article, and between the two title-generating tools. Some naming choices are still slightly misleading, such as get_series returning the full collection rather than a single series, and generate_cover_image references a non-existent upload_image tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clean lowercase verb_noun pattern, including create_*, get_*, list_*, and add_* names. Notable exceptions are upgrade, a bare verb that also mixes read and mutate behaviors, and get_series, which functions more like a list than a get.

Tool Count3/5

23 tools is in the heavy range for an MCP server, exceeding the ideal 3-15 span. That said, the tools do span legitimate blogging concerns such as articles, reactions, series, newsletters, analytics, and AI assistance, so the count feels broad rather than padded.

Completeness2/5

The surface covers article creation, reading, updating, and publishing, but there is no delete or unpublish for articles/drafts, no way to remove an article from a series, and no update/delete for series. The dangling reference to upload_image in generate_cover_image also suggests a missing tool, and agents will hit dead ends trying to undo publication or remove content.

Resources

Need Help?