Skip to main content
Glama

ZOOQ - LinkedIn Data for AI Agents

posts_all

Read-onlyIdempotent

A person's recent posts / activity stream. Cursor- or offset-paginated. Keyed by the person entityId: pass handle and Zooq resolves it for you at no extra credit cost, or pass entityId from profile_entity_id to skip the lookup. (Costs 10 Zooq credits.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
startNoPagination offset (alternative to cursor).
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor (preferred) from the previous response's nextCursor.
handleNoPublic profile handle — the part after linkedin.com/in/ — or the full profile URL. Resolved to `entityId` automatically at no extra credit cost. Any person identifier is accepted here and sorted by format (handle, URL, ACoAA… entityId, prsn_ id). Provide `entityId` OR `handle`; `handle` is the simplest.
entityIdNoLive person entityId (ACoAA…) from profile_entity_id / profile_enrich; the urn:li:fsd_profile: form is accepted. A prsn_ id (dataset namespace, from profile_full) or a handle placed here is recognized and translated automatically. Provide `entityId` OR `handle`.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
activitiesNoArray in the example
nextCursorNoExample value was a string

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses two pagination modes, the handle-resolution behavior, the ability to skip lookup with entityId, and the 10-credit cost. These are concrete behavioral facts an agent needs before calling.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the resource, and every clause adds information: pagination, keying, lookup behavior, and cost. No filler or repetition.

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 an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the remaining invocation context: pagination mechanism, required identity selection, and cost. An agent has what it needs to call the tool correctly.

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 the schema already documents handle resolution, entityId forms, and pagination. The description adds little new parameter-level meaning beyond framing the keying choice ('skip the lookup') and cost; this is a baseline-3 case.

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 identifies the exact resource: a person's recent posts/activity stream, and the pagination language ('Cursor- or offset-paginated') makes the list operation unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like posts_info (single post), posts_comments, and companies_posts by being person-scoped and plural.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: when you need a person's recent posts and have a handle or entityId. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the person-scoped wording implies the choice versus company/comment/post-info tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are separated by domain prefixes and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences, but there are direct overlaps: companies_name_lookup is the same upstream as search_companies, companies_entity_id vs companies_universal_name_to_id resolve different id spaces, and search_people/search_people_live plus search_companies/search_companies_live cover similar ground. An agent can usually pick correctly, but only after close reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set is consistently snake_case with readable domain prefixes like companies_, jobs_, posts_, profile_, and search_. Deviations include the unexplained g_* prefix, jobs_details_v2's version suffix, affiliate_program lacking a resource prefix, and the duplicate naming convention of companies_name_lookup vs search_companies.

Tool Count2/5

45 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and creates a heavy surface for an agent to scan. While the domains are broad, some tools are redundant (companies_name_lookup/search_companies) or tangential (affiliate_program), so the count is not fully justified.

Completeness4/5

The server covers people, companies, jobs, posts, email, schools, and skills with both search and detail endpoints, which is strong for a read-only LinkedIn API. Obvious gaps like a global post search or a company followers list are absent, but the existing paths support most workflows without dead ends.