SendIt

Schedule Multilang Content

schedule_multilang_content

Schedule the same post in multiple languages, linking all variants into one translation group.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No	Optional shared title for supported platforms.
`team_id`	No	Team ID to operate in team scope. Get available teams with list_teams. If omitted, uses personal scope.
`mediaUrl`	No	Optional shared public HTTPS media URL.
`timezone`	No	Optional IANA timezone stored with the scheduled posts.
`versions`	Yes	Language-specific post variants. Maximum 11 versions per request.
`mediaType`	No	Optional shared media type hint.
`mediaUrls`	No	Optional shared public HTTPS media URLs.
`scheduledAt`	Yes	Future ISO 8601 publish time for every language version.

Schema Changelog

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

First observedMay 5, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds the key behavioral insight that all variants are linked into a single translation group, which is not captured by the annotations. This complements the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false) by explaining a significant side effect of the operation.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and includes the unique 'translation group' detail. Every word contributes value with no filler.

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 rich input schema and annotations, the description adequately explains the tool's core purpose and unique behavior. It does not describe return values or post-scheduling effects, but no output schema exists and the operation is clear enough for selection and invocation.

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 8 parameters, including nested version fields. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 description clearly states the tool's function: scheduling the same post in multiple languages while linking variants into one translation group. This specific verb+resource phrasing distinguishes it from sibling tools like schedule_content and bulk_schedule.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies appropriate use for multilingual scheduling but does not explicitly mention when to choose this over alternatives such as schedule_content_advanced or bulk_schedule. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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?