uplika

Publish a Naver Blog draft as it is

publish_naver_draft

Destructive

Naver Blog only. Publishes a draft from the blog's draft box exactly as it is in Naver: the extension loads that draft in the editor and presses publish, so edits the person made by hand in Naver are kept. Do not send content. Category, tags and openType are taken from the draft unless you pass them. Returns the same shape as publish (202 with a target that resolves to published, or the bridge object when the extension is offline; wait: true holds until it settles). If that draft was made through uplika (a target whose externalId starts with draft:), the same post record flips to published instead of a second one appearing. To publish uplika's own copy of the text rather than what is in Naver, use update_post on that post instead. If the response carries bridge, bridge.nextStep says what is needed: run_wake means Chrome with the extension is closed, so tell the person bridge.userMessage with the bridge.wake command for their OS and retry once after they say Chrome is open; ask_user_login / ask_user_update mean tell the person bridge.userMessage. Do not retry more than twice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	Replace the draft's tags (no #).
`wait`	No	Hold until the extension finishes, up to 75 seconds. Past that it returns while still going out; read it with get_post.
`logNo`	Yes	The draft's logNo from list_naver_drafts.
`title`	No	Replace the draft's title.
`category`	No	Category by name instead of id.
`openType`	No	Visibility. Default: the draft's own setting.
`accountId`	No	Which Naver Blog account. Required only when the workspace has more than one.
`categoryId`	No	Category id from list_accounts. Default: the draft's own.
`workspaceId`	No	Which workspace this is for. Only needed when the account has more than one — the error tells you the ids when it matters. Leave it out if it is already decided; do not ask the person again.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 29, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / wait / description

Previous value: -"Hold until the extension finishes (up to 5 minutes)."New value: +"Hold until the extension finishes, up to 75 seconds. Past that it returns while still going out; read it with get_post."

AddedSep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only flag it as a non-readonly, destructive, open-world write; the description adds the mechanism (extension loads the draft and presses publish, so manual Naver edits survive), the dedupe rule (a draft: externalId draft flips the same post record to published rather than creating a duplicate), the offline bridge object, and the wait:true timeout behavior. This is rich context well beyond the 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?

Front-loaded with the core behavior and the key exclusion ('Do not send content') before the recovery detail. It is dense and long, but nearly every sentence carries actionable information; the bridge section is verbose where a compact mapping would do.

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?

For a destructive, network-dependent write with no output schema, the description covers the success shape (202 with a target resolving to published), the deferred/offline shape, the dedupe outcome, and the user-facing recovery path. An agent has everything needed to call it and handle failure.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds the framing rule that category, tags and openType fall back to the draft unless explicitly passed, binding the override parameters into one behavioral contract. It largely echoes schema defaults, hence not a 5.

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 with scope: publishes a Naver Blog draft exactly as it sits in the draft box, and explicitly says content is not sent. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming update_post and publish, so an agent can route without opening other schemas.

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?

Gives explicit when-not guidance ('Do not send content') and names the alternative path: to publish uplika's own copy of the text, use update_post on that post instead. It also enumerates the bridge failure modes and the exact recovery action for each (run_wake, ask_user_login, ask_user_update) with a retry cap of two.

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

All uplika 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?