Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

HeyReagent LinkedIn MCP

by io.github.linglistack
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Send or skip many cards

decide_cards
Destructive

Decide many waiting cards at once, after the user said so ("send them all", "skip these"). decision "send": every message, invitation, comment, reply or accepted invitation among them is checked again as it goes and sent; one a check holds stays waiting with why, and posts, InMails, profile changes and withdrawals are never sent this way (decide those one by one with decide_card). Leave out cardIds to send every such card that is waiting. decision "skip" drops each, with the reason when given.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "decision": "<decision>"
    },
    "name": "decide_cards"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonNoFor skip: why, in the user's words.
cardIdsNoCard ids from list_cards. Leave out to mean all that are waiting (send only).
decisionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses that send rechecks each card and can hold one back with a reason, that certain card types are never sent this way, and that skip drops each card with an optional reason. This is meaningful behavioral context for a destructive bulk operation.

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?

The description is dense and front-loaded, with no filler. However, the long run-on sentence around send behavior and held cards is harder to parse than necessary and could be structured more clearly.

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?

For a destructive bulk mutation with no output schema, the description covers the important gaps: which cards are eligible, what happens on send or skip, when to omit cardIds, and when to use decide_card instead. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers 67% of parameters, but the description adds critical meaning for the decision enum by explaining what send and skip actually do. It also clarifies that omitted cardIds means all waiting sendable cards, not simply all cards.

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 states a specific verb and resource (decide many waiting cards at once) and explicitly distinguishes the bulk tool from the single-card sibling decide_card. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and how it differs from decide_card without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit usage conditions tied to user intent ("send them all", "skip these"), explains the two decision modes, and names the alternative decide_card for posts, InMails, profile changes, and withdrawals. It also states when omitting cardIds is appropriate.

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

All HeyReagent LinkedIn MCP toolsInspect
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.

Resources