instagram-mcp

get_mentions

Fetch recent Instagram posts that @-mention a given account, with an adjustable limit on results.

Instructions

List recent media where the account is @-mentioned (tags edge).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_mentions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`account`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.2Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys read-only intent via 'List' but omits pagination behavior, ordering, the notion of 'recent', and how the optional account parameter interacts with the default account. The 'tags edge' hint is technical, not behavioral.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the parenthetical 'tags edge' adds precise context without bloating the text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only list tool with an output schema, the description gives enough to understand the basic purpose. However, the zero annotation coverage and undocumented parameters create gaps around the account and limit semantics, so the definition is adequate but not complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only tangentially clarifies 'account' through 'where the account is @-mentioned' and says nothing about the 'limit' parameter or its default. This leaves the agent without meaningful guidance for either parameter.

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 the verb 'List', the resource 'media', and the specific scope 'where the account is @-mentioned'. The parenthetical 'tags edge' further distinguishes this from siblings like list_media and get_hashtag_media.

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 wording implies this tool is for retrieving media that mentions the account, but it never explicitly says when to use it over list_media or get_hashtag_media, nor when to supply the account parameter. Guidance is only inferred from the mention context.

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