AT Protocol MCP Server

report_content

Destructive

Report specific content violating community guidelines or terms of service. Supply the AT-URI and CID with a reason type to submit a moderation request for review.

Instructions

Report content that violates community guidelines or terms of service. Submits a moderation report to the network; moderators review it asynchronously and the report cannot be withdrawn once submitted. Requires authentication (app password). Use report_content when you have the AT-URI and CID of the specific post or record; use report_user when reporting an entire account rather than a single piece of content. Subject to per-tool rate limiting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`subject`	Yes	Strong reference identifying the specific content record to report.
`reasonType`	Yes	Category of the violation: "spam" for unsolicited bulk content, "violation" for ToS breach, "misleading" for misinformation, "sexual" for adult content, "rude" for harassment, "other" for anything else.
`reason`	No	Optional free-text explanation of the violation (max 2000 characters). Providing detail helps moderators act faster.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`success`	Yes	Whether the report was submitted successfully.
`message`	Yes	Human-readable result message.
`reportId`	Yes	Numeric identifier of the newly created moderation report (as a string).
`reportDetails`	Yes	Echo of the submitted report parameters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.6.2Jun 23, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedInput schema / properties / subject / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.6.0Jun 11, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / reason / description

Added value: +"Optional free-text explanation of the violation (max 2000 characters). Providing detail helps moderators act faster."

addedInput schema / properties / reasonType / description

Added value: +"Category of the violation: \"spam\" for unsolicited bulk content, \"violation\" for ToS breach, \"misleading\" for misinformation, \"sexual\" for adult content, \"rude\" for harassment, \"other\" for anything else."

addedInput schema / properties / subject / description

Added value: +"Strong reference identifying the specific content record to report."

addedInput schema / properties / subject / properties / cid / description

Added value: +"CID (Content Identifier) of the specific version of the record to report."

addedInput schema / properties / subject / properties / uri / description

Added value: +"AT-URI of the content to report (at://did/collection/rkey)."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Human-readable result message.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "reportDetails": {
+      "description": "Echo of the submitted report parameters.",
+      "properties": {
+        "reason": {
+          "description": "Optional free-text explanation supplied in the request.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "reasonType": {
+          "description": "The short reason category supplied in the request.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "subject": {
+          "description": "AT-URI of the reported content.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "subject",
+        "reasonType"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "reportId": {
+      "description": "Numeric identifier of the newly created moderation report (as a string).",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "description": "Whether the report was submitted successfully.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success",
+    "message",
+    "reportId",
+    "reportDetails"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Jun 9, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
First observedv0.2.1Jun 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: the report is asynchronous, cannot be withdrawn, requires authentication (app password), and is subject to per-tool rate limiting. This aligns with the 'destructiveHint: true' annotation.

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 three sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose, then provides key behavioral details, and finishes with sibling differentiation. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity, presence of an output schema, and thorough annotations, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral traits, and parameter hints adequately. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

The input schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description only adds minimal extra value, noting that providing a reason helps moderators act faster. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool reports content that violates community guidelines or terms of service, using the verb 'report' and specifying the resource as content. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'report_user' by stating when to use each.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly provides guidance on when to use this tool (when you have AT-URI and CID) versus the alternative 'report_user' (for accounts). It also mentions required authentication, async review, and non-withdrawal.

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