cancel_post
Cancel a scheduled post by id.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Postlia
by com.postlia
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the primitive action. It does not disclose whether cancellation is destructive, reversible, or requires specific permissions. Effects on related data are omitted.
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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise but could include more contextual information without becoming verbose.
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?
Despite low complexity, the description lacks essential context: no mention of return value, success/error behavior, or what to do if the scheduled post does not exist. The output schema is absent, but that doesn't justify the omission.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It says 'by id' but does not explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., post id or scheduled post id) or how to obtain it. No additional details beyond the schema.
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?
The description explicitly states the action (cancel) and the resource (scheduled post) with the key parameter (by id). It clearly distinguishes from siblings: create_post, list_accounts, list_scheduled_posts.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing the post to be in a scheduled state, or what happens if the id is invalid.
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
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a unique resource and action: drafts, scheduled posts, published posts, accounts, analytics, quota, and queue info are all clearly separated. No two tools overlap in purpose; even similar-sounding ones like list_scheduled_posts and list_published_posts are distinct.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., create_post, list_drafts, get_posting_quota). The use of 'list_' for collections and 'get_' for single items/summaries is predictable and logical.
Tool Count5/5
14 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and appropriately covers the domain of social media post management, scheduling, drafts, analytics, and account inspection. Each tool serves a distinct function without redundancy.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers the full lifecycle of posts and drafts: create, read, update, delete, schedule, cancel, and reschedule. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct way to convert a draft into a post, but this can be worked around by copying content.