Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

GenFlick

by com.genflick
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

social cancel post

native.social_cancel_post
DestructiveIdempotent

Cancel the specified event or exact destination IDs. Already published posts remain published; accepted cancellations are recovered durably.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.social_cancel_post"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
work_idYes
argumentsYes
read_skillsYesExact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
request_keyYes
publication_proposal_idNoFor native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
expected_catalog_versionYesFor a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive, idempotent, open-world and non-read-only, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds two real facts beyond that: published posts are not retracted, and accepted cancellations are durably recovered (idempotency of retry behavior). It still omits permission requirements, the effect of expectedRevision mismatch, and what happens on partial destination failure.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the durability caveat. No filler, though "event or exact destination IDs" spends words without resolving the object ambiguity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a destructive, six-parameter, nested-schema operation with concurrency controls, and the description explains neither the optimistic-concurrency role of expectedRevision nor the purpose of work_id, request_key, or publication_proposal_id. An output schema exists so return values need not be covered, but the invocation contract is under-explained for a mutation of this complexity.

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?

Only eventId and destinationIds are touched on ("event or exact destination IDs"), and even that wording is ambiguous. work_id, arguments, expectedRevision, and request_key are undocumented in the description, and schema coverage sits at 50%, so the meaning of the revision guard and request key is carried by neither source.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The verb is "Cancel" but the object is described as "the specified event or exact destination IDs," which mixes the post/publication being cancelled with its targeting parameters. It never says plainly that this cancels a scheduled social post, and it does not distinguish itself from the sibling cancel_social_publication. The intent is inferable from the tool name rather than the prose.

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?

"Already published posts remain published" implicitly bounds when this can be used (scheduled, not live, content), which is genuinely useful. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of prerequisites such as an existing session or proposal, and no routing to cancel_social_publication or native.social_read_queue.

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

All GenFlick toolsInspect
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