Octopost

Retry failed networks

retry_failed

Retry publishing to platforms that failed on a previous post. Only retries platforms that had errors — already-successful platforms are not re-published.

Call get_post first to see which platforms failed and why. You can retry all failed platforms or specify specific ones.

Common failure reasons: expired tokens (user needs to re-connect), rate limits (wait and retry), network errors (usually transient).

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": {
      "post_id": "<post_id>"
    },
    "name": "retry_failed"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`post_id`	Yes	The post ID (UUID) to retry.
`platforms`	No	Specific platforms to retry. Omit to retry ALL failed platforms.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description goes beyond them by clarifying that successful platforms are never re-published and by explaining failure causes and remediation, which matters for a non-idempotent retry on external platforms. It does not say what the response reports after a retry attempt, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

The core behavior and scope come first, the prerequisite follows, and the failure-reason list is compact and decision-relevant. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and failure handling well. The only meaningful gap is what the tool returns after a retry (per-platform results), leaving the agent without expectations about the response.

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 post_id and platforms are already documented, including the enum list and 'Omit to retry ALL failed platforms.' The description restates the omit-vs-specify behavior without adding syntax or constraint details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb (retry) and resource (publishing to failed platforms) plus the key scope constraint: already-successful platforms are not re-published. That scope statement separates it from publish_draft, queue_post, and create_post without needing to name them.

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?

It gives an explicit prerequisite ('Call get_post first to see which platforms failed and why'), states the two invocation modes (all failed vs. specific platforms), and maps common failure reasons to the right action (re-connect tokens, wait on rate limits, transient network errors). This is exactly the when/when-not guidance an agent needs.

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

All Octopost 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?