Upload-Post

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Upload document (LinkedIn)

upload_document

Publish PDF, PPT, DOC, or DOCX documents to LinkedIn. Schedule posts or add to a queue, with options for visibility and page targeting.

Instructions

Publish a document (PDF / PPT / PPTX / DOC / DOCX) to LinkedIn. Title is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`user`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`timezone`	No	IANA timezone for scheduled date, e.g. 'Europe/Madrid'.
`addToQueue`	No	Insert into the user's posting queue instead of publishing now.
`asyncUpload`	No	Return immediately with request_id (default true).
`description`	No
`scheduledDate`	No	ISO 8601 date for scheduled publishing, e.g. '2026-12-25T10:00:00Z'. Omit for immediate post.
`maxPostsPerSlot`	No
`documentPathOrUrl`	Yes
`linkedinVisibility`	No
`targetLinkedinPageId`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.1Sep 9, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

removedOutput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.7.0Jul 29, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / autogenerate

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "If true, AI generates native per-platform title/description from the media and fills any field left empty.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / autogenerateDescription

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Generate only the description with AI.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / autogenerateLanguage

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Force the AI output language (ISO code); omit to auto-detect from the media.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / autogenerateTitle

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Generate only the title with AI.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}

First observedv0.4.0Jul 16, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe write operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond 'Publish' – it doesn't mention asynchronous behavior, queue interaction, scheduling, or side effects like overwriting. Given that annotations cover the safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate; the description adds minimal value beyond the structured metadata.

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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. Every word serves a purpose: 'Publish' sets the verb, 'document' and the format list define the resource, and 'Title is required' highlights a critical constraint. There is zero redundancy or filler, making it exceptionally concise and well-structured.

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 tool with 11 parameters and low schema coverage, the description is notably sparse. It does not explain optional parameters such as scheduling, queue insertion, visibility, or page targeting. While an output schema exists (which may document return values), the description fails to provide essential usage context for a complex publishing tool. The agent would need to infer too much from parameter names alone.

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 description coverage is 36%, which is low, so the description should compensate. It does add value by enumerating supported file formats for documentPathOrUrl, which is not in the schema. However, it does not explain any of the other 8 optional parameters (e.g., scheduledDate, addToQueue, linkedinVisibility, targetLinkedinPageId). The description only partially offsets the schema gap, so a 3 is warranted.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Publish'), a resource ('document'), the target platform ('LinkedIn'), and lists supported formats (PDF/PPT/PPTX/DOC/DOCX). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like upload_video, upload_text, and upload_photos, which handle other media types. The purpose is unambiguous and operationally specific.

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?

The description provides clear context: this tool publishes documents to LinkedIn. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond 'Title is required'. While the sibling names imply a division of labor, the description leaves the selection logic to inference.

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

Deploy Server