Retrieve all connected social media accounts and their IDs from your RecurPost workspace to manage scheduling and content automation.
List all connected social media accounts with their IDs
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspace_id | No | Workspace ID (ws_id from workspace_list). Omit to use your default workspace. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.3Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseInput schema / properties / workspace_idAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Workspace ID (ws_id from workspace_list). Omit to use your default workspace.",
+ "type": "string"
+}v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and 'List' does imply a read-only operation with the useful addition that IDs are returned. However, it does not disclose authentication expectations, workspace-scoping behavior, or any caveats about which accounts are visible.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is one focused sentence with no filler. The core action, resource, and expected output are all front-loaded and immediately actionable.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple optional-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. The only plausible gap is not stating the intended use in the broader workflow (e.g., retrieving IDs before posting), but the schema covers the sole parameter and the purpose is clear.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the workspace_id parameter is already clearly described in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('connected social media accounts') and specifies the output ('IDs'). It naturally distinguishes this tool from siblings like connect_social_account_urls, which performs a different action on the same resource.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as connect_social_account_urls or post_content. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, and no mention of the workflow context in which account IDs are needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.