insta-pilot

ig_comment_hide

Hide or unhide an Instagram comment on a professional account through the official API, useful for moderating spam or unwanted replies.

Instructions

Oculta (o muestra con hide=false) un comentario.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "comment_id": "<comment_id>"
    },
    "name": "ig_comment_hide"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hide`	No
`account`	No	Usuario de Instagram configurado (por defecto la cuenta activa)
`dry_run`	No	true = solo muestra lo que haría, sin ejecutar
`comment_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is partly covered. The description usefully discloses that the operation is reversible (hide=false restores visibility), which is behavior beyond the annotations, but says nothing about permissions, side effects on replies, or confirmation of the change.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and its inverse. Nothing is wasted, though the extreme brevity leaves the definition under-specified rather than maximally efficient.

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 mutation with no output schema, the definition is minimally viable: the action and its inverse are clear. It omits permissions, notification side effects, and success/failure behavior, and one parameter remains undocumented in both schema and description.

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 coverage is only 50%: account and dry_run are documented in the schema, but hide and comment_id are not. The description compensates for the undocumented hide parameter by explaining that hide=false un-hides, which the schema's bare boolean default does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb ('Oculta') and resource ('un comentario'), and clarifies the inverse mode via hide=false. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the close siblings ig_comment_delete and ig_comments_toggle, so an agent must still infer which of the three to pick.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus ig_comment_delete or ig_comments_toggle, nor any prerequisite or permission guidance. The 'hide=false' clause is a parameter behavior note, not a usage guideline.

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