Skip to main content
Glama
Upload-Post

Upload-Post

Official
by Upload-Post
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Public reply to comment

public_reply_to_comment
Destructive

Posts a public reply under an Instagram comment after generating a preview for user approval, ensuring nothing is sent until confirmed.

Instructions

Post a public reply visible under the original Instagram comment. Needs the user's approval: call it first without confirmed to get a preview (nothing is sent), show the user exactly what will go out, and repeat the call with confirmed: true only after they approve.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userYes
messageYes
platformNoSocial platform. Only 'instagram' is currently supported.instagram
commentIdYes
confirmedNoSet to true only after the user has seen the preview this tool returns without it and approved it. Without it nothing is sent.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.17.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmed
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Set to true only after the user has seen the preview this tool returns without it and approved it. Without it nothing is sent.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.1
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  3. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: a call without `confirmed` sends nothing and returns a preview, so the destructive call is gated by a dry run. It also discloses visibility (public reply under the original comment). It doesn't mention rate limits, permission requirements, or whether a posted reply can be edited/removed afterward.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does, then the approval protocol in call order (preview → show → confirm). No filler and no repetition of schema text beyond the parameter names needed to explain the flow.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be described, and annotations carry the safety profile; the approval workflow is fully specified. The remaining gap is how to source `commentId` and what `user` identifies, which matters for a 5-parameter mutation.

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 coverage is only 40%, and the description adds meaning only for `confirmed`, which the schema already documents fully. The three required parameters (`user`, `commentId`, `message`) are unexplained — e.g. whether `user` is an account handle or ID, and where `commentId` should come from (get_post_comments).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Post a public reply") plus the scope ("visible under the original Instagram comment"), which implies how it differs from the private/other reply siblings. It stops short of naming the closest sibling (reply_to_comment) or clarifying when that one applies instead.

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?

Gives explicit procedural guidance for the two-phase approval loop: call first without `confirmed` to get a preview, show the user, then repeat with `confirmed: true`. What's missing is routing guidance against alternatives like reply_to_comment or create_comment, so the agent can't tell from this text which reply flavor to pick.

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