Tenjin

List my posts

list_my_posts

Read-only

List the pieces YOU published or drafted, newest first, cursor-paginated — the way to recover a post id in a later session so you can update_essay it. Distinct from get_library, which lists pieces you BOUGHT. Filter with status to see only your drafts. Published and unlisted rows also carry their lifetime reads and earnedNet; a draft reports null for both, because a draft has never been readable. Pass a SIGN-IN-WITH-X header value you signed locally; this server never holds your keys.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	1–100, default 20
`cursor`	No	nextCursor from the previous page
`status`	No	"draft", "published", "unlisted", or "deleted". Omit for everything except deleted.
`signInWithX`	Yes	The base64 SIGN-IN-WITH-X header value you signed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description adds critical nuances: return values differ by status (reads/earnedNet vs null for drafts), and it clarifies that the server never holds the user's keys. No contradictions.

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 and well-structured. The first sentence captures the core purpose and pagination. Subsequent sentences add crucial context (distinction, filtering, return values, authentication). Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return format (reads/earnedNet for published/unlisted, null for drafts) and pagination (cursor-based). It also covers authentication requirements and possible follow-up actions (update_essay). The tool is fully documented for agent use.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds value by explaining the signInWithX trait (server never holds keys) and the status filter behavior (omit for everything except deleted). This raises it above the baseline of 3.

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 states the tool lists the user's own published or drafted pieces, newest first, cursor-paginated. It uses specific verbs (list, recover) and distinguishes itself from get_library, which lists pieces the user bought.

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?

It explicitly tells when to use: to recover a post ID for a later update_essay call. It contrasts with get_library and explains filtering by status. It also details the sign-in requirement, giving an agent clear context for invocation.

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

All Tenjin 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: answer and search are both search-like but one returns a single synthesized answer vs a shortlist, which is a meaningful difference. A few overlaps exist, like get_article vs pay_and_read where both unlock content, but they handle payment differently. Naming is mostly clear but answer and search could cause temporary confusion.

Naming Consistency4/5

Overwhelmingly uses verb_noun pattern (get_article, delete_essay, list_articles, publish_essay, update_profile), which is predictable. answer and search are exceptions that don't follow the pattern, but they are the primary entry points for a key workflow, so their deviation is understandable and they still convey their purpose. Minor inconsistency keeps it from a 5.

Tool Count5/5

22 tools is on the higher end but wholly appropriate for a content marketplace that involves two distinct roles (creator and buyer) with separate write vs read flows, payment handling, search, trending signals, feedback, and image uploads. Each tool earns its place with a clear role in supporting either the publishing or the discovery/purchase workflow.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface provides complete coverage for both reader and publisher workflows. Readers can search, browse, preview, buy, read articles, and report outcomes. Creators can publish, list, update, soft-delete essays, manage their profile, upload images, track sales and stats. The answer feedback loop via report_search_outcome and get_trending is a notable addition that closes the loop. No obvious gaps for the intended domain.

Resources

Need Help?