Skip to main content
Glama

x_api_unrepost_post

Undo a repost of a tweet on X by deleting the repost using the source tweet ID. Requires OAuth user permissions.

Instructions

Unrepost Post. Use when: Unrepost Post. Do not use when: a more specific auth/configuration tool is required before the API call or you are only exploring; prefer x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion first. Risk: mutating, high-risk. Required permissions and prerequisites: OAuth 2 user token with scopes tweet.read, tweet.write, users.read; OAuth 1a user token Environment-selection behavior: scopeTenantId plus exactly one of scopeUserId or scopeAccountId choose the Vault/Postgres tenant principal used for auth resolution. credentialKey selects a non-default stored credential profile when present. Parameter formats and constraints: id (path, unknown, required); source_tweet_id (path, unknown, required). Expected response shape: { ok, status, data: { method, path, url, status, contentType, authType, data } } Common failure conditions: missing scoped credentials in Vault, missing required API parameters, X API auth failures, rate limits, or unsupported multipart/body shape. Recommended prerequisite and follow-up tools: x_connection_info, x_schema_discovery, x_auth_upsert_principal_credentials, x_api_request. Safety warnings: This mutates X state. Validate scope, payload, and authorizationKey before use. Example: {"name":"x_api_unrepost_post","arguments":{"scopeTenantId":"default","scopeUserId":"default","id":""}}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
scopeUserIdNo
credentialKeyNo
scopeTenantIdNo
scopeAccountIdNo
source_tweet_idYes
authorizationKeyNo
preferredAuthTypeNo
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It clearly states the mutating/high-risk nature, required OAuth scopes, environment-selection behavior, common failure conditions, response shape, and safety warnings. This goes well beyond a minimal disclosure.

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?

The description is organized with labeled sections, which aids scanning, but it contains redundancy: 'Use when: Unrepost Post' repeats the purpose, and 'Risk: mutating, high-risk' overlaps with the later safety warning. It is longer than necessary but not excessively bloated.

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 complex, mutating API tool with no output schema, the description provides an expected response shape, required permissions, environment-selection behavior, failure conditions, and an example. It is missing detailed semantics for source_tweet_id and some auth parameters, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool with caution.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does identify id and source_tweet_id as required path parameters and explains scopeTenantId/scopeUserId/scopeAccountId/credentialKey usage, but it leaves the actual meaning of source_tweet_id and authorizationKey underspecified. The 'unknown' format field provides little value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description says 'Unrepost Post,' which directly restates the tool name and provides no additional scope or semantic detail. It does not explain what unreposting a post entails or how it differs from related actions beyond the obvious sibling x_api_repost_post.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description includes 'Do not use when' guidance and recommends alternative discovery tools (x_schema_discovery, x_query_suggestion) for exploration scenarios. However, the 'Use when' section is tautological ('Unrepost Post') and it never compares this tool to other mutating post actions like x_api_delete_posts or x_api_unlike_post.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/LesterAJohn/X-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server