IQFluence MCP

Media plan

build_media_plan

Draft a media plan: expected views, engagements, CPM and cost per engagement for one post per creator.

Views and engagements are each creator's averages from their report (1 credit per creator without a report from the last 30 days): tell the user the cost, and ask first when it is more than 5 credits. Fees are optional; the user can also type them into the plan.

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": {
      "platform": "<platform>",
      "accounts": "<accounts>"
    },
    "name": "build_media_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fees`	No	Fee for one sponsored post, keyed by the same strings as in accounts
`accounts`	Yes
`currency`	No		USD
`platform`	Yes	Social network
`allow_outdated`	No	If fresh data is still being collected, use the latest available data instead

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world tool but say nothing about cost or consent. The description supplies exactly that: a credit-charging model (1 credit per creator lacking a report in the last 30 days) and a mandatory confirmation threshold above 5 credits. It does not explain what happens on partial failure or how the 'from the last 30 days' freshness interacts with allow_outdated, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the cost/consent rule in a short parenthetical, then the optional-fees caveat. Every clause carries information and nothing is padded, though the parenthetical about credits is dense enough that a reader may need a second pass.

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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description pre-declares the returned metrics, the credit-cost rule, and the confirmation requirement, which is most of what an agent needs before invoking it. Missing details such as the shape of account identifiers, the currency default, or behavior when data is stale keep it from being fully complete.

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 coverage is 60%, so the schema already carries the platform enum and the allow_outdated explanation. The description adds meaning for 'fees' (optional, user may type them into the plan) and implies that 'accounts' maps one post per creator, but currency and the expected account-identifier format go unaddressed. Adequate but not compensating for the remaining coverage gap.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Draft a media plan') and even enumerates the computed metrics (views, engagements, CPM, cost per engagement) and the unit of work ('one post per creator'). It does not name a sibling to contrast with, but no sibling in the list plausibly overlaps with plan building, so ambiguity risk is low.

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 an actionable operating rule: report the credit cost to the user and ask for confirmation when it exceeds 5 credits, plus the note that fees are optional and can be supplied by the user. It stops short of saying when a media plan is the right choice versus running separate reports, but the guidance is concrete and behavioral rather than implied.

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

All IQFluence MCP 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.

Resources

Need Help?