Social & Content MCP Server
Server Details
MCP server for social media and content data including social profiles, engagement metrics, content trends, and influencer analytics for AI agents.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 2.9/5 across 4 of 4 tools scored.
Each tool targets a completely distinct platform and content type (Steam games, dev.to articles, Eventbrite events, podcasts). No ambiguity exists between searching for games versus articles versus events.
Mixed verb conventions: three tools use 'search_' (search_devto, search_events, search_podcasts) while one uses 'get_' (get_steam_games) despite all being search operations. All use snake_case, but the verb inconsistency creates mild confusion.
Four tools is a reasonable, focused set for a content discovery server. While the 'Social & Content' domain is broad, the specific scope of cross-platform search is appropriately covered without bloat, though slightly on the minimal side.
Only search functionality is provided with no ability to retrieve specific items by ID (e.g., get event details, get specific podcast episode) or perform social actions. For a 'Social & Content' server, the lack of create/update operations or social interaction tools represents notable gaps.
Available Tools
4 toolsget_steam_gamesBRead-onlyInspect
Search Steam game platform for video games by title or keyword. Returns game name, price in USD, average user rating, review count, release date, and Steam store page URL. Use for game discovery, price monitoring, or review research before purchase.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Game title or genre search (e.g. 'Elden Ring', 'strategy games', 'indie puzzle') | |
| max_results | No | Number of game results to return (default 10) |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses return values (titles, prices, ratings) which compensates for missing output schema, but omits auth requirements, rate limits, or cache behavior.
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?
Extremely concise (9 words) and front-loaded with action, though brevity sacrifices parameter guidance.
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?
Adequate for simple 2-parameter tool; covers return values since no output schema exists, but misses opportunity to clarify 'max_results' default behavior.
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 has 0% description coverage, yet tool description provides no parameter semantics (e.g., whether 'query' matches titles, descriptions, or tags; 'max_results' bounds).
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?
Clear verb ('Search') and resource ('Steam games') distinguish it from sibling search tools in different domains (devto, events, podcasts), though explicit differentiation is absent.
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?
No guidance on when to use versus sibling search tools or when not to use (e.g., for non-Steam games).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_devtoCRead-onlyInspect
Search dev.to platform for developer articles, tutorials, and technical posts. Returns article title, author, read time, publication date, tags, and direct link. Use for learning new dev topics, finding tutorials, or staying updated on developer community trends.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search keywords for developer content (e.g. 'React tutorial', 'Docker basics', 'TypeScript patterns') | |
| max_results | No | Number of articles to return (default 10, good for recent content) |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose auth requirements, rate limits, return format, or side effects beyond the basic search action.
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?
Single sentence is appropriately front-loaded and concise, though it sacrifices necessary detail for the sake of brevity.
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?
Implies it returns articles/tutorials, but without an output schema, the description lacks specifics about return structure (URLs, content, metadata).
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 has 0% description coverage, yet the description adds no meaning for 'query' (expected format) or 'max_results' (constraints/limits).
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?
Clearly states the action (search) and resource (dev.to articles/tutorials), and effectively distinguishes from siblings (games, events, podcasts).
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?
Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_eventsCRead-onlyInspect
Search Eventbrite for upcoming local and online events by topic and location. Returns event name, date/time, location, ticket price, event description, and registration URL. Use for event discovery, community involvement, or entertainment planning.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Event type or topic to find (e.g. 'tech conference', 'comedy show', 'food festival') | |
| location | No | City or region to search for events (e.g. 'New York, NY', 'Los Angeles', 'virtual') |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as result limits, pagination, rate limiting, or authentication requirements.
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?
Extremely brief and front-loaded, but overly terse given the lack of schema documentation and annotations that require explanation elsewhere.
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?
Adequate for a simple tool with two primitive parameters, but lacks mention of return value structure given the absence of an output schema.
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 has 0% description coverage, yet the description doesn't compensate by explaining what 'query' matches against (titles, descriptions?) or what format 'location' expects (city, zip, coordinates?).
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?
Clearly identifies the action (search), platform (Eventbrite), and target (upcoming events), distinguishing it from siblings that target Steam, Dev.to, and podcasts.
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?
Provides no guidance on when to use versus alternatives, when to include the location parameter, or query formatting tips.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_podcastsBRead-onlyInspect
Search podcast directories for episodes matching topics or keywords. Returns episode title, podcast name, description, episode length, publish date, and streaming link. Use for podcast discovery, topic research, or building listening playlists.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Podcast topic or search terms (e.g. 'technology news', 'business interviews', 'science explanations') | |
| max_results | No | Number of podcast episodes to retrieve (default 10) |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose rate limits, data source, pagination, or what constitutes a result.
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?
Extremely terse at 6 words with no bloat, though arguably too brief given the lack of output schema and parameter descriptions.
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?
Missing critical information about return values since no output schema exists; doesn't indicate what data structure or fields are returned.
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?
Mentions 'by topic' hinting at query parameter semantics, but provides no guidance on max_results despite 0% schema description coverage.
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?
Clearly states the tool searches podcast episodes by topic, distinct from siblings handling games, articles, or events.
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?
Usage is implied by the name and sibling differentiation, but lacks explicit when/when-not guidance or alternative recommendations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!