Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

WoopSocial Social Media MCP

by com.woopsocial
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Describe MCP tool schema

schema_describe
Read-only

Returns the canonical input schema.

Use this before calling a tool when the expected arguments are unclear, when validation errors mention missing or invalid fields, or when a tool supports multiple modes, platforms, targets, schedules, content types, or other variants. This is especially useful for complex tools such as posts_create, where required fields and valid enum values depend on the selected target.

If jsonPointer is provided, returns only that sub-schema. If toolName is omitted, returns the available tool names and summaries.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "schema_describe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolNameNoName of the MCP tool to describe. Omit to list describable tools.
jsonPointerNoOptional JSON Pointer into the selected tool's input schema, for example /properties/socialAccounts/items. Use this to inspect a nested part of a large schema.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower, but the description adds the two meaningful modes: partial-schema retrieval via jsonPointer, and a discovery mode returning tool names/summaries when toolName is omitted. It does not describe error behavior for an unknown toolName or pointer, which is the main remaining gap.

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 output statement, then conditions, then mode-switching behavior – a good ordering for scanning. The variant list ('modes, platforms, targets, schedules, content types, or other variants') is slightly padded but justifies the guidance.

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

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description does explain what comes back (the schema, a sub-schema, or a tool list with summaries), which is the key missing piece for a lookup tool. Only the failure/unknown-tool case is unaddressed, a minor gap for a two-parameter read-only tool.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameter descriptions already explain the omit-to-list fallback and the JSON Pointer usage, so the description is largely restating structured data. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the parameter semantics on its own.

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 ('Returns the canonical input schema') plus the scoping unit (a named tool). It also distinguishes the meta-lookup from the operational siblings, which all perform media/post/project actions rather than describing 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 concrete triggering conditions: before calling a tool when arguments are unclear, after validation errors mentioning missing or invalid fields, and when a tool has multiple modes/variants. It even names the sibling case in point (posts_create) so the agent can map the rule to a real tool.

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

All WoopSocial Social Media MCP toolsInspect
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