SendIt

Edit Scheduled Post

edit_scheduled_post

Idempotent

Edit a pending scheduled post. Supports text, media, platform, timing, approval-scope, and publish-now updates.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Compatibility alias for postId.
`text`	No	Updated post text.
`postId`	No	Scheduled post ID.
`team_id`	No	Team ID to operate in team scope. Get available teams with list_teams. If omitted, uses personal scope.
`mediaUrl`	No	Replacement public HTTPS media URL, or an empty value to remove media.
`timezone`	No	Optional IANA timezone for the updated schedule.
`mediaUrls`	No	Replacement public HTTPS media URLs.
`platforms`	No	Optional replacement platform list.
`applyScope`	No	Whether to apply the edit to only this post or this and future occurrences.
`publishNow`	No	If true, publish immediately after applying the edit.
`scheduleId`	No	Compatibility alias for postId.
`scheduledAt`	No	Compatibility alias for scheduledTime.
`firstComment`	No	Optional replacement Instagram first comment.
`scheduledTime`	No	Updated ISO 8601 scheduled publish time.
`pinterestBoardId`	No	Optional replacement Pinterest board ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedMay 7, 2026

removedInput schema / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "postId"
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "scheduleId"
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "required": [
-      "id"
-    ]
-  }
-]

First observedMay 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds behavioral context by listing the types of updates supported, including the non-obvious 'approval-scope' and 'publish-now' behaviors that modify scheduling and publishing flow. Annotations already mark readOnly=false and destructive=false, and the description does not contradict them; it supplements them with these update capabilities.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the primary action first, then compactly lists supported update types without waste.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (15 params, no output schema), the description does not explain parameter relationships or side effects, but the rich schema descriptions and annotations fill most gaps. It misses some nuance like whether partial updates are allowed, but overall it's sufficient.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% description coverage for all 15 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description groups parameters into update categories (text, media, etc.) without adding detailed syntax or relationships, so it does not elevate the score.

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 opens with 'Edit a pending scheduled post' – a specific verb ('edit'), resource ('scheduled post'), and state ('pending'). It enumerates the supported update categories (text, media, platform, timing, approval-scope, publish-now), distinguishing it from sibling tools like edit_post or delete_scheduled_post.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'pending scheduled post' clearly scopes the tool to only pre-publication states, implying it should not be used for published posts or for scheduling new posts. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it gets a 4 rather than a 5.

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

All SendIt tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

With 148 tools, there is significant overlap. For example, generate_content, publish_ai, generate_post_bundle, and request_project_content all generate content; get_analytics, get_unified_analytics, get_post_analytics, get_ad_performance, and get_unified_ad_report all fetch performance metrics; and list_inbox vs list_conversations blur comment and conversation management. Descriptions help, but boundaries between tools are often unclear.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_teams, create_goal, delete_post), but there are notable deviations: create_library_item vs save_to_library, publish_content vs publish_ai, schedule_content vs schedule_content_advanced, and connect_platform vs connect_connector. Mixed prefixes like 'autopilot_', 'check_', and 'get_' are fine, but overlapping verbs and a hyphen in 'connect_linkedin-page' reduce consistency.

Tool Count1/5

148 tools is extreme for any server. Even for a broad social media management platform, this is far beyond what an agent can effectively navigate. The count is unwieldy and suggests the surface should be split into multiple focused servers (publishing, analytics, connectors, workflows, etc.).

Completeness3/5

The core social publishing workflow is well covered (create, schedule, publish, edit, delete, retry), and there are extensive features for analytics, workflows, connectors, and AI agents. However, some resources have CRUD gaps: no update/delete for brand voices, no delete_project, no update/delete for Product Hunt goals, and no explicit get_workflow. These are workable but notable omissions.

Resources

Need Help?