FeedSquad

Help Center

get_help

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns task-oriented prose help on one topic: overview (what FeedSquad does and where to start), posting (the draft → approval lifecycle, which tool handles which job, media, linting and brand memory), campaigns (multi-post sequences), limits (caps + spacing rules), connection (reconnecting to grant a new scope, cached tool descriptions, the catalogue version), platforms (character limits, hashtags, links and image shapes per platform), scheduling (timezones, founder-local times and the approval rules: what each call does to a post's status), pages (publishing articles to a FeedSquad Pages site from any MCP client, a private beta: the steps, the approval rule and the monthly limit on unreviewed drafts). Without a topic it returns the overview and the list of topics.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_help"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`topic`	No	Help topic

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`content`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior the annotations cannot: the fallback to overview plus a topic list when no topic is supplied, and the scope of each help article. It does not describe response length or format, but an output schema exists.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, and every parenthetical item adds decision-relevant information. The single mega-sentence with a long inline list is dense and would scan better as a bulleted mapping, but no sentence is filler.

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?

For a one-optional-parameter read-only help tool with an output schema, the definition covers purpose, topic coverage, and the no-argument default. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the enum is self-describing by name, so baseline would be 3. The description goes further by expanding every enum value into its actual subject matter and by specifying the default when the optional topic is omitted, which the schema does not state.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns task-oriented prose help on one topic') and then enumerates exactly what content each topic delivers. This clearly separates it from action-oriented siblings like capabilities, get_plans, and lint_post.

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?

The per-topic breakdown gives strong context for choosing a topic (e.g. 'connection' for reconnecting to grant a new scope, 'scheduling' for approval rules), and the final sentence covers the no-topic default. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives such as capabilities or get_plans, so there is no when-not guidance.

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

All FeedSquad 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?