Taplio for LinkedIn

Update draft

update_draft

Idempotent

Update the content of an existing LinkedIn post draft, optionally attaching media by media_ids (from list_media, or a media_id from create_media_upload_url whose bytes you have uploaded). content replaces the draft text, but media already attached is preserved automatically — you only pass media_ids to ADD media. Only drafts can be edited — published or scheduled posts cannot.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The id of the draft to update (from list_drafts).
`content`	No	The new full text body (replaces existing content). 1 to 3000 characters.
`media_ids`	No	Optional ids of media to attach — from list_media (already uploaded) or from create_media_upload_url after you PUT the bytes. Referenced by id only.
`document_title`	No	Optional title LinkedIn shows for a PDF attached via media_ids in this same call. Defaults to the PDF file name. Ignored if no PDF is attached in this call. Up to 100 characters; letters, digits, spaces and hyphens are kept.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`media`	No
`status`	Yes
`content`	Yes
`created_at`	Yes
`updated_at`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / updated_at
```
Added value: +{
+  "$ref": "#/properties/created_at"
+}
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / document_title

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional title LinkedIn shows for a PDF attached via media_ids in this same call. Defaults to the PDF file name. Ignored if no PDF is attached in this call. Up to 100 characters; letters, digits, spaces and hyphens are kept.",
+  "maxLength": 100,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / media / items / properties / title

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Document title shown on LinkedIn. Only set for documents.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuinely non-obvious semantics: content fully replaces the existing text, previously attached media is preserved automatically, and media_ids are additive only. It does not discuss permissions or rate limits, but for a draft-edit tool the important mutation semantics are disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scoped by the eligibility constraint at the end. Every sentence carries information, though the middle clause ('but media already attached is preserved automatically — you only pass media_ids to ADD media') is slightly tangled and could read more cleanly.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers the draft-only constraint, replacement semantics, and additive media behavior. For a four-parameter tool whose schema is fully documented, this is complete enough to call correctly; only document_title interactions are left to the schema.

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 would be 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that media_ids are ADD-only and that existing media survives, and it names the source tools for obtaining ids. The only gap is document_title, whose behavior is left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update the content of an existing LinkedIn post draft') and immediately names the secondary capability (attaching media). The closing sentence restricts scope to drafts versus published/scheduled posts, which cleanly separates it from siblings like publish_draft, schedule_draft, and update_comment_draft.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use condition ('Only drafts can be edited — published or scheduled posts cannot') and explains that media_ids should come from list_media or create_media_upload_url, effectively routing the agent to prerequisite tools. It stops short of naming explicit alternatives for the non-draft case (e.g. pointing to publish_draft or unschedule), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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

All Taplio for LinkedIn 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.