Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
chc-social

chc-social

by CHCDOLADEEPSEEKMKSEC
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

social_schedule

Queue social posts for future publication by specifying the network, text, optional media, and scheduled time.

Instructions

Queue a post for a future time.

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": {
      "network": "<network>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "social_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dueNo
textYes
mediaNo
networkYes
in_secondsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose that this is a mutation that creates a persistent scheduled item, whether it can be inspected or cancelled afterward, permission requirements, or behavior when the time argument is omitted or in the past.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally clean. However, the brevity stems from under-specification rather than disciplined editing, so it does not earn a high mark.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a five-parameter scheduling mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the definition is far too thin. Nothing tells an agent which parameters are mandatory, how the two time fields interact, or what a successful call produces.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across five parameters, and the description compensates only marginally. "Future time" gestures at due/in_seconds but never explains that these are two alternative ways to specify the schedule, nor what network, text, or media mean or why network and text are required.

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 pairs a specific verb ("Queue") with a specific resource ("post") and a temporal scope ("for a future time"), which distinguishes it from an immediate-post tool in the sibling list. It stops short of naming or contrasting any sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 offers no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternatives. An agent must guess whether this is the right entry point versus social_post or social_queue based purely on the word "future".

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools