neuron

Create Blog Post

neuron_create_blog_post

Create a new blog post in draft or published status with specified title, content, and optional metadata such as tags, excerpt, and SEO fields. Content supports full markdown (GFM) AND raw HTML — images/GIFs via alt , videos via , YouTube/Loom embeds via , collapsible sections via /, plus , , , with inline styles, etc.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tags`	No	List of tag names or slugs to categorize the post
`title`	Yes	Title of the blog post (max 500 characters)
`status`	No	Initial publication status of the post (default: 'draft')	draft
`content`	Yes	Full body content of the blog post in markdown format. Supports raw HTML inline via rehype-raw. Rich content options: images/GIFs via ![alt](url), videos via <video src="url" controls></video>, embedded YouTube/Loom via <iframe src="embed-url"></iframe> (rendered in 16:9 aspect ratio), collapsible sections via <details><summary>Title</summary>content</details>, plus <mark>, <kbd>, <abbr> and other HTML elements.
`excerpt`	No	Short summary or preview text for the blog post
`seoTitle`	No	Custom SEO title override for search engine results
`authorType`	Yes	Whether the post is authored by an individual user or the organization
`seoKeywords`	No	List of SEO keywords for search engine optimization
`coverImageUrl`	No	URL of the cover image displayed at the top of the post
`seoDescription`	No	Meta description for search engine result snippets

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations are neutral (readOnlyHint: false, etc.), so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool creates a post and supports rich content (markdown, HTML). However, it does not mention side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is idempotent. The description adds some context but could be more detailed.

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 brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence efficiently lists content capabilities without unnecessary words. Every sentence serves a purpose, making it highly concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 10 parameters and no output schema. The description covers creation behavior and content features but omits return value, error handling, and prerequisites. For a complex tool, this is adequate but not complete. More details on output or failure modes would improve completeness.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by elaborating on the 'content' parameter's supported formats (markdown, HTML, embeds), which goes beyond the schema. However, for other parameters like tags or excerpt, it merely mentions them without further detail. Overall, it adds moderate semantic value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: creating a new blog post with status (draft/published), title, content, and optional metadata. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the action distinct. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like update_blog_post or publish_blog_post, which would warrant a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it relates to other blog post tools. This limits an agent's ability to select the correct tool.

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

All neuron 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

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are clearly separated by resource type, but there is meaningful overlap in messaging entry points (send_message, send_whatsapp, compose_message, bot_api_send) and contact ingestion/sync tools (import_contacts, populate_contacts, sync_whatsapp_contacts). The descriptions help disambiguate, but with 309 tools an agent will frequently need to read closely to pick the right one.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority of tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: create_*, get_*, list_*, update_*, delete_*. Minor deviations like sales_stats, lead_stats, wallet_balance, and whoami break the pattern slightly, but overall naming is highly predictable.

Tool Count1/5

309 tools is an extreme count for any MCP server, even a broad platform. This creates significant cognitive load and navigation overhead for agents, and far exceeds the well-scoped 3-15 tool range where coherence is strongest.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is remarkably comprehensive across bots, contacts, campaigns, flows, knowledge bases, personas, marketplace, wallet, and products. Minor gaps exist — lead sources lack update/delete tools, and there is no single get_task or get_webhook alongside their list/update/delete counterparts — but these are workable gaps rather than dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?