mastodon-mcp-server

Blocks

blocks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve accounts currently blocked by the authenticated Mastodon account, with an optional limit to control result count.

Instructions

Get accounts blocked by the authenticated account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results (default 40).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.5Sep 12, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
addedInput schema / properties / limit / default
```
Added value: +40
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object",
+  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
+}

First observedv1.0.1Jun 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond these annotations, such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list endpoint.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and rich annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could mention pagination or limit handling, but the schema and output structure cover most context an agent needs.

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 100% and the single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any parameter meaning, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage baseline of 3.

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 and resource: 'Get accounts blocked by the authenticated account.' It clearly distinguishes blocked accounts from muted accounts and other sibling resources, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from similar list endpoints or mention scope beyond the authenticated account.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like mutes, account_relationships, or account_block. Usage is only implied by the tool's purpose, with no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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

Deploy Server