Narrareach

Check Substack verification

get_substack_verification_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read whether your connected Substack publication needs a code and whether a code request is waiting. Does not request a code, change the connection, or publish. Only the connected account owner can check it. If a code is waiting, ask for it in a normal chat message and wait for the reply; do not send another code.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`connectionId`	Yes	The exact Substack connection from the publishing response or get_user_profile.
`scheduledPostId`	No	The exact saved article job from the publishing response. Pass it to resume that same job after verification.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`method`	No
`message`	Yes
`required`	No
`verified`	No
`cancelled`	No
`challenge`	No
`expiresAt`	No
`connection`	No
`nextAction`	No
`instruction`	No
`publication`	Yes
`connectionId`	Yes
`articleRecovery`	No
`resumedArticles`	No
`scheduledPostId`	No
`connectedAccount`	No
`deliveryConfirmed`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / scheduledPostId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The exact saved article job from the publishing response. Pass it to resume that same job after verification.",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / challenge / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "properties": {
-      "expiresAt": {
-        "format": "date-time",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "id": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "method": {
-        "anyOf": [
-          {
-            "enum": [
-              "email",
-              "totp"
-            ],
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          {
-            "type": "null"
-          }
-        ]
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "id",
-      "method",
-      "expiresAt"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "expiresAt": {
+        "format": "date-time",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "method": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "enum": [
+              "email",
+              "totp"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "scheduledPostId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "id",
+      "method",
+      "expiresAt"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / scheduledPostId
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 10, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / instruction
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / nextAction
```
Added value: +{
+  "const": "wait_for_code",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
AddedOct 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds value: it states the operation is non-mutating, discloses the owner-only authorization constraint, and tells the agent not to trigger a redundant code request. It does not describe rate limits or latency, but for a read-only status probe that is minor.

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?

Three tightly written sentences with zero filler; the core read purpose is front-loaded and the exclusions plus the follow-up instruction are ordered by importance.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers the key non-obvious behaviors (owner-only access, no side effects, do-not-resend-code). What remains unspecified is minor, e.g. the relationship between the check and the subsequent complete_substack_verification step.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so connectionId and scheduledPostId are already documented in the schema, including where to source them and what scheduledPostId does. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (read) and resource (Substack verification status) with two precise sub-questions: whether a code is needed and whether a request is waiting. It explicitly disambiguates from the sibling mutation tools (start_substack_verification, cancel_substack_verification, complete_substack_verification) by declaring what it does NOT do: request a code, change the connection, or publish.

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?

Gives concrete operational guidance: only the account owner may check, and if a code is waiting, ask for it in a normal chat message rather than sending another code. It does not name the alternative tool (start_substack_verification) for requesting a code, so the routing is implied rather than explicit.

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

All Narrareach 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?