Social Post Flow

Update Post Tool

update-post-tool

Destructive

Update an existing scheduled post. Only posts with status "scheduled" can be updated.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "post_type": "<post_type>",
      "profile_ids": "<profile_ids>",
      "schedule_type": "<schedule_type>"
    },
    "name": "update-post-tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The ID of the post to update.
`url`	No	A URL to include in the post. Required for link type. Cannot be combined with media_urls (except for pin and google).
`text`	No	The post text/caption. Required for all types except story.
`post_type`	Yes	The type of post: text, link, image, story, pin.
`media_urls`	No	Array of publicly accessible media URLs. Required for image, story and pin types.
`profile_ids`	Yes	Array of social profile IDs to post to. Get these from list-profiles-tool.
`scheduled_at`	No	ISO 8601 datetime for when to post. Required when schedule_type is "scheduled". Must be in the future.
`first_comment`	No	Optional first comment (not available for story types). Max 2000 chars.
`schedule_type`	Yes	When to publish: immediate, queue_start, queue_end, or scheduled.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / profile_ids / description

Previous value: -"Array of social profile IDs to post to. Get these from list_profiles."New value: +"Array of social profile IDs to post to. Get these from list-profiles-tool."

First observedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the scheduled-status gate, but omits a key behavioral fact visible only in the schema: three fields are required even for a "partial" update, implying replace-like semantics rather than a patch — worth disclosing for a destructive tool.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the operation stated first and the eligibility constraint immediately after. Nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness3/5

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, and the schema carries the field-level detail. However, for a destructive 9-parameter mutation, the description does not address whether the update overwrites unmentioned fields or how failures on non-scheduled posts surface.

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 all nine parameters, the enums, and the cross-field constraints (url vs media_urls, scheduled_at required for scheduled) are already documented. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline.

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 and resource ("Update an existing scheduled post") plus an eligibility constraint on status. An agent can distinguish it from create-post-tool and delete-post-tool from the name and sentence, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

The sentence "Only posts with status 'scheduled' can be updated" gives a precondition, which is useful gating, but there is no guidance on when to use this versus create-post-tool (for new posts) or delete-post-tool, nor what to do about non-scheduled posts.

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

All Social Post Flow 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?