Add a note to the team's thread on a post. The note is visible to the whole team in the app, authored by the MCP key's user.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | Note text (max 5000 characters) | |
| post_id | Yes | Post id (UUID) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations only provide negative hints, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It usefully discloses that the note is visible to the whole team, is authored by the MCP key's user, and is added to an existing thread. It does not mention idempotency or failure modes, but the core behavioral effect is well covered.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences with zero filler. The action is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides meaningful behavioral context rather than redundant restatement.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple two-parameter create operation with no output schema and no safety annotations, the description adequately explains the effect, visibility, and authorship. It could mention response or error behavior, but that is not essential for an agent to invoke it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already provides: content is the note text and post_id is the target post. It reinforces the context but does not compensate for any schema gaps because none exist.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific action and resource: 'Add a note to the team's thread on a post.' It also clarifies the note's visibility and authorship, which distinguishes it from read-only note listing and from other post-level actions like tagging or favoriting.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The intended use is clear: call this when you want to add a team-visible note to a post's thread. There are no explicit alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool duplicates this capability (the related list_post_notes is read-only), so the usage context is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.
The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.
At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.
Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.
