meta-social-mcp

fb_create_video_post

Publish a video to a Facebook Page by providing a public video URL. Add an optional caption to accompany the post.

Instructions

Upload and publish a video to the Facebook Page from a video URL.

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": {
      "video_url": "<video_url>"
    },
    "name": "fb_create_video_post"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`video_url`	Yes	Publicly reachable URL of the video file.
`description`	No	Description/caption for the video.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the mutation ('upload and publish') without covering prerequisites, permissions, post visibility, processing delays, supported video formats, or failure behavior. It is not misleading, but it is nearly silent on side effects.

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?

The description is a single efficient sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It earns its place, although it sacrifices behavioral detail for brevity.

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 mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too thin to fully support correct invocation. It omits expected return value, confirmation behavior, whether the post is immediately published, and any constraints on the video URL. It is minimally adequate for identifying the tool but not for confident execution.

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 input schema covers both parameters at 100%, so the schema already documents them. The description adds minimal semantic context by indicating the video comes from a URL, but it does not provide any extra format, constraint, or usage detail beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('Upload and publish'), a clear resource ('video to the Facebook Page'), and the input source ('video URL'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from the sibling text/photo post tools by media type, so an agent can tell what it does at a glance.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: use it when posting a video from a URL. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it, no mention of alternatives like fb_schedule_post or fb_create_photo_post, and no clarification of how it differs from the Instagram video tool.

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