Bluesky MCP Server

get-list-posts

Retrieve posts from users in a specified Bluesky list. Provide the list URI and select either the number of posts or the hours to look back.

Instructions

Fetch posts from users in a specified list

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": {
      "list": "<list>",
      "count": "<count>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "get-list-posts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`list`	Yes	The URI of the list (e.g., at://did:plc:abcdef/app.bsky.graph.list/listname)
`type`	Yes	Whether count represents number of posts or hours to look back
`count`	Yes	Number of posts to fetch or hours to look back

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Fetch posts' with no additional behavioral details such as authentication requirements, rate limits, sorting, or pagination. This is a minimal disclosure.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

The tool is relatively simple with no output schema, but the description could provide more context about the 'type' parameter (posts vs hours) or what constitutes a 'list'. As is, it is minimally complete but leaves some ambiguity about behavior and return value.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the description does not need to explain them. The description itself adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action (fetch posts) and the specific resource (users in a specified list). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-user-posts or get-timeline-posts, which fetch from different sources.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies that this tool is for fetching posts from a list of users, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or any exclusions. The context is implied, not explicit.

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