patreonmcp

list_posts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve posts for a campaign using cursor pagination. Set page size, include full HTML when needed, and omit campaign ID only if the token sees one campaign.

Instructions

List posts for a campaign with cursor pagination.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cursor`	No	next_cursor from a previous list_posts call.
`page_size`	No	Results per page (1-1000).
`campaign_id`	No	Campaign ID. Omit only when the token can see exactly one campaign.
`include_content`	No	Include full post HTML. Off by default because post bodies can be large.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`posts`	No
`total`	No
`next_cursor`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds only the cursor-pagination trait, which is already documented in the schema, and gives no extra context on auth, rate limits, or scoping behavior.

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 states the action, scope, and pagination model efficiently.

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?

Rich annotations, a full-coverage input schema, and an output schema mean the description need not explain safety or return values. However, it leaves a real gap by not distinguishing list_posts from sibling list_drafts or get_post, and provides no usage guidance.

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%, so all four parameters are fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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: 'List posts', with scope 'for a campaign' and behavior 'cursor pagination'. It is clearly distinguishable from get_post, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling list_drafts or explain what kind of posts are returned.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no alternatives. It implies scoping to a campaign but does not tell the agent when to prefer list_posts over get_post or list_drafts.

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