Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

bluesky_post_thread

Retrieve a Bluesky post with its nested replies and parent chain, up to a chosen depth, to view or analyze full conversation threads.

Instructions

A Bluesky post and its reply tree. Returns a Bluesky post along with its nested replies (and, when the post is itself a reply, its parent chain), up to depth levels deep.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uriYesThe post's at:// URI, e.g. from an author-feed or search-actors result's post uri field
depthNoReply-tree depth, 1-10

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior: nested replies and a parent chain are returned, bounded by depth. However it says nothing about pagination, rate limits, or auth, so it adds some value but leaves key operational traits unstated.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource before the depth nuance, with no wasted words. Slightly terse but efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description properly explains the return shape (post, nested replies, parent chain). Combined with full schema coverage and a depth bound, an agent has enough to call it correctly, though a note on pagination or thread limits would complete it.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates the depth-levels concept but adds no syntax, format, or edge-case meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb (returns) and resource (a Bluesky post and its reply tree), and the second sentence clarifies the scope with nested replies and parent chain. It distinguishes itself from feed/search siblings by being a thread-retrieval tool, though it doesn't name a specific sibling.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives named among the many bluesky_* siblings (e.g. bluesky_post_likes, bluesky_search_actors). The URI parameter hint ('from an author-feed or search-actors result') gives a faint usage pointer but no routing rule.

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