flayr

Update, pause or resume a queue

update_queue

DestructiveIdempotent

[PUBLISHES to social accounts · publish scope] status: "paused" stops new bookings (already-booked posts stay booked); "active" resumes. Other fields (platforms, cadenceHours, timeOfDay, lookahead, startsAt, name) apply from the next booking. Needs the publish scope (or admin) on the Agency plan or higher. (Wraps PATCH /api/v2/queues/{id}.)

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_queue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`name`	No
`status`	No
`brandId`	No
`startsAt`	No	ISO 8601 with an offset (or Z). Nothing is booked before it; the first slot is the first timeOfDay (in the queue's timezone) at or after it, so a startsAt that is itself a slot is the first slot. A past date holds nothing back. null clears it.
`lookahead`	No
`platforms`	No	Replaces the queue's platforms for items booked from now on. Already-booked items keep theirs; items with their own `platforms` keep using them.
`timeOfDay`	No	24-hour "HH:MM" local time.
`cadenceHours`	No	1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, or whole days (24, 48, …, 720).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses what pausing does and does not destroy (already-booked posts stay booked), that only one field takes effect immediately while the rest apply from the next booking, and the exact auth requirement (`publish` scope or admin on Agency plan+). That is material side-effect and permission context an agent cannot infer from the annotations.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the scope tag and the highest-value behavioral fact (pause semantics) before the less critical field/deferred-effect details. The leading scope tag and trailing '(Wraps PATCH /api/v2/queues/{id}.)' note are borderline filler but do aid orientation.

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 9-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, it covers permission requirements, immediate vs. deferred effects, and the pause/resume distinction. The main gaps are `brandId` semantics and any hint about what the call returns or how a partial update is applied beyond the next-booking rule.

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?

With schema coverage at only 44%, the description usefully compensates by naming the fields with deferred semantics (platforms, cadenceHours, timeOfDay, lookahead, startsAt, name) and by explaining the pause/resume enum values of `status`. `brandId` is left entirely undocumented in both places, which keeps this short of a 5.

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+resource (update a queue) and specifies the two mutation modes that matter most: `status: "paused"` stops new bookings while `"active"` resumes. It also scopes what an update touches ("other fields ... apply from the next booking"), which separates it from tools that modify already-booked items such as update_scheduled_post or queue_item_action.

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 gives clear when-to-use context for the status field and explains the deferred effect of the other fields, plus the prerequisite scope/plan. It does not name alternative tools (e.g. delete_queue, update_scheduled_post, queue_item_action) or state when this tool should not be used, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All flayr 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?