insta-pilot

ig_publish_story

Publish an image or video as an Instagram Story, with optional dry-run preview to verify the action before posting.

Instructions

Publica una historia (imagen o vídeo).

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": {
      "media": "<media>"
    },
    "name": "ig_publish_story"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`media`	Yes	URL pública o ruta local (local requiere INSTA_PILOT_BLOB_TOKEN)
`account`	No	Usuario de Instagram configurado (por defecto la cuenta activa)
`dry_run`	No	true = solo muestra lo que haría, sin ejecutar

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write/safe-mutation profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not mention publishing rate limits (a sibling ig_publishing_limit exists), account targeting, or what dry_run accomplishes in practice.

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 with zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded. It is efficiently sized, though there is no structure beyond the one clause.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a side-effecting publish tool with no output schema, the description is too thin: it omits publishing-limit implications, what a successful publish returns, and any caveats about account selection or media requirements. Annotations cover safety only, leaving real operational gaps.

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 three parameters (media, account, dry_run) are already documented in the schema, including the INSTA_PILOT_BLOB_TOKEN requirement for local paths. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case.

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 ('Publica') and resource ('una historia') and constrains the media types to image or video. It is clearly distinct from ig_publish_reel/ig_publish_image/ig_publish_carousel by resource name, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named. The agent must infer from the sibling names alone whether a story is the right target versus a reel or feed post.

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