Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nilyo

by com.nilyo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Facebook / Messenger: Comment on post

facebook_comment_on_post
Destructive

Comment as the explicitly selected identity, with at most one image. External action: preserve explicit user approval. Never retry after an uncertain failure; inspect current state first.

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": {
      "post_id": "<post_id>",
      "text": "<text>",
      "comment_as": "<comment_as>"
    },
    "name": "facebook_comment_on_post"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes
post_idYesFull Facebook post.id (<author_id>_<post_id>) from facebook_list_user_posts or facebook_get_post. Not a URL, text or author ID alone.
account_idNoOwned Facebook unipile_account_id from list_connected_accounts. Not a Facebook person or Page ID. Required when several Facebook accounts exist.
comment_asYesExplicit publishing identity: me or an activated administered Page ID from facebook_list_inboxes -> page_id, verified in Hosted Auth. A Page's messaging id and profile_id can differ. Never infer one from the other; reconnect the same account to activate Pages.
attachmentsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent, and the description adds genuinely non-redundant behavior: this is a public external action requiring explicit user approval, must not be retried after an uncertain failure, and current state should be inspected first. That directly addresses the non-idempotent risk the annotations only hint at.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraints. No filler; each sentence carries either a scope limit or a safety rule.

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?

For a mutating, open-world action with no output schema and rich parameter descriptions, the safety and identity requirements are covered well. It stops short of stating permissions/activation prerequisites referenced in the schema and any failure/response behavior, but the essentials for correct invocation are present.

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 coverage is 60% and the schema itself explains post_id, account_id, comment_as and attachment content thoroughly. The description only adds 'explicitly selected identity' and 'at most one image', which mirror rather than extend those fields; the remaining gap (post_id/account_id sourcing) is already handled by the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (comment) and resource (post), plus the identity-as-publisher constraint and the one-image limit. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from facebook_reply_to_comment, which targets a comment rather than a post.

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?

'Preserve explicit user approval' and 'inspect current state first' give operational guidance on when/how to proceed, but nothing tells the agent when to pick this over facebook_reply_to_comment or facebook_create_post, or what prerequisites (e.g. activated Page identity) gate it.

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

All Nilyo 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