Feedlio

List post analytics

list_post_analytics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Performance of the workspace's published posts: impressions, views, reactions, comments, shares, engagements (reactions + comments + shares as the platform reports them) and engagement rate (engagements / impressions, or / views). Covers posts published through Feedlio on platforms Feedlio reads analytics from; stories are not included. Metrics refresh periodically (see last_synced_at) and a platform may not report every metric (null). Sort by recent or by a metric to find the best or weakest posts. For one post use get_post_analytics; for patterns across posts use get_insights.

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": "list_post_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`days`	No	Look back this many days (default 30)
`page`	No	Page number, starting at 1
`sort`	No	recent (default) or a metric, highest first
`limit`	No	Results per page, 1-50 (default 10)
`platform`	No	Only this platform, e.g. instagram
`workspace_uid`	No	uid from list_workspaces; omit for the default workspace

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a read-only, idempotent, closed-world listing, but the description adds non-obvious behavior: coverage is limited to posts published through Feedlio on platforms Feedlio reads analytics from, stories are excluded, metrics refresh periodically per last_synced_at, and platforms may return null for metrics they do not report. That is meaningful context beyond the annotations, though permission or workspace-scope requirements are left to the schema.

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 first sentence front-loads what the tool provides and defines the metrics; subsequent sentences add coverage limits, refresh semantics, sorting purpose, and sibling routing in a tight sequence. There is no filler, and the parenthetical definition of engagements/engagement rate is justified because no output schema exists.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining returned fields, and it defines each metric plus the engagement-rate formula and null behavior. It also discloses scope limits and the sync-timestamp reference, leaving no gap an agent would need in order to call the tool correctly.

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 interpretive meaning to sort ('find the best or weakest posts') and flags that null metric values may affect ordering. It does not explain days/page/limit beyond what their schema descriptions already say, so it stays just above baseline.

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 description names a specific verb and resource (performance of the workspace's published posts) and enumerates the metrics returned, so an agent knows exactly what this tool yields. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from get_post_analytics and get_insights, which is the sibling-differentiation a 5 requires.

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 states when to use this tool versus the two nearest alternatives: 'For one post use get_post_analytics; for patterns across posts use get_insights.' It also describes the sorting modes and their purpose (find the best or weakest posts), giving explicit selection guidance rather than implied usage.

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

All Feedlio 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?