Reach MCP — LinkedIn for AI agents

update_scheduled_post

Idempotent

Update the text and/or scheduled time of an existing scheduled LinkedIn post. post_urn is the URN returned by list_scheduled_posts (e.g. urn:li:ugcPost:…). At least one of text or scheduled_at must be provided. Only for posts still scheduled (post_urn from list_scheduled_posts); a published post cannot be edited through Reach.

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": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>",
      "post_urn": "<post_urn>"
    },
    "name": "update_scheduled_post"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	No	Plain text to send or post.
`post_urn`	Yes	URN of the scheduled post (urn:li:…), from list_scheduled_posts.
`account_id`	Yes	Reach id of the LinkedIn account to act on, from list_accounts.
`scheduled_at`	No	Unix timestamp in milliseconds.
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional. A key you choose (a UUID is fine) that names this exact call. If you retry with the same key and the same arguments, the first call's result is returned and nothing is done twice on LinkedIn. Reusing a key with different arguments is refused. Keys expire after 24 hours.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`updated`	No
`post_urn`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so safety and idempotency are covered structurally. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral scope: the requirement that at least one mutable field be supplied and the fact that published posts are out of reach. It does not restate the idempotency semantics, which the schema documents, but the added constraints make it more than a repeat of annotations.

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?

Three tightly written sentences with the core action front-loaded and constraints following. There is mild redundancy between the first parenthetical (post_urn returned by list_scheduled_posts) and the closing clause, but nothing that undermines the structure.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers the mutation scope, required inputs, key parameter provenance, and the restriction on published posts, which is everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the 3 baseline applies, but the description adds a real cross-parameter constraint absent from the schema: only account_id and post_urn are marked required, yet the description correctly states that at least one of text or scheduled_at must be provided. That goes beyond the per-field descriptions.

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 (update an existing scheduled LinkedIn post) and scopes it to text and/or scheduled time. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_post, delete_scheduled_post, and list_scheduled_posts without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states the precondition (at least one of text or scheduled_at must be provided), the source of the key parameter (post_urn from list_scheduled_posts), and an exclusion (published posts cannot be edited through Reach). All the when-to-use and when-not-to-use context is present.

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

All Reach MCP — LinkedIn for AI agents 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?