publish_now
Queue a variant for immediate delivery. Irreversible; requires confirm: true.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | Yes | ||
| variant_id | Yes |
Cadencz
by com.cadencz
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose two critical behaviors: the operation is irreversible and requires confirmation. However, it does not explain what 'queue for immediate delivery' actually does at the system level, such as effects on existing scheduled posts or required permissions.
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 a single sentence that packs the core action, irreversibility, and the confirm requirement with no wasted words. The semicolon structure separates the main action from crucial caveats effectively.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers the essential safety and confirmation requirements for an irreversible action, but it is incomplete. With no output schema and no annotations, it lacks details about what 'immediate delivery' entails, how to obtain variant_id, or any side effects. It remains minimally viable but has clear gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'confirm' by saying it must be true, but it provides no explanation for 'variant_id.' Partial compensation at best.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific action ('queue') and resource ('variant') with a clear time scope ('immediate delivery'). It is clear enough to distinguish from sibling tools like schedule_post, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'requires confirm: true' and 'irreversible,' which are cautions, but there is no explicit 'use this when...' or comparison to schedule_post.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct action in the content workflow: planning, composing, approving, scheduling, canceling, publishing, querying, and analytics. Even similar actions like schedule_post and publish_now are clearly separated by timing and irreversibility.
Naming Consistency5/5
Tool names consistently use snake_case verbs followed by nouns (list_channels, compose_post, cancel_scheduled_post). The pattern is predictable and makes resource-action relationships easy to infer.
Tool Count5/5
14 tools is well-scoped for a content planning and social publishing server. Each tool covers a meaningful step in the workflow without redundant or excessive additions.
Completeness4/5
The set covers the core content lifecycle: plan, compose, approve, schedule, publish, cancel, and analyze. Minor gaps exist around editing existing drafts or directly modifying plan items, but these can be worked around with the provided tools.