Skip to main content
Glama

follow_user

Follow a user on Bluesky Social by entering their handle to connect with their content and updates.

Instructions

Follow a user.

Args:
    ctx: MCP context
    handle: Handle of the user to follow

Returns:
    Status of the follow operation

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
handleYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'follow_user' tool. It resolves the handle to a DID and calls the Bluesky client's follow method. Decorated with @mcp.tool() for automatic registration.
    @mcp.tool()
    def follow_user(
        ctx: Context,
        handle: str,
    ) -> Dict:
        """Follow a user.
    
        Args:
            ctx: MCP context
            handle: Handle of the user to follow
    
        Returns:
            Status of the follow operation
        """
        try:
            bluesky_client = get_authenticated_client(ctx)
    
            # First resolve the handle to a DID
            resolved = bluesky_client.resolve_handle(handle)
            did = resolved.did
    
            # Now follow the user - follow method expects the DID as subject parameter
            follow_response = bluesky_client.follow(did)
    
            return {
                "status": "success",
                "message": f"Now following {handle}",
                "follow_uri": follow_response.uri,
                "follow_cid": follow_response.cid,
            }
        except Exception as e:
            error_msg = f"Failed to follow user: {str(e)}"
            return {"status": "error", "message": error_msg}
  • server.py:1075-1075 (registration)
    The 'follow_user' tool is listed in the profiles category within the tools info resource.
    "profiles": ["get_profile", "get_follows", "get_followers", "follow_user"],
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 states the action 'follow a user' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, whether it's idempotent, what happens if the user doesn't exist, or if there are privacy restrictions. The description is minimal and lacks critical operational context.

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?

The description is brief and structured with sections for Args and Returns, making it easy to scan. However, the 'ctx' parameter in Args is unnecessary clutter since it's an MCP implementation detail not relevant to the agent. Overall, it's efficient but could be more focused.

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?

Given the complexity (a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return value ('Status of the follow operation') in detail, such as success indicators or error conditions. For a tool that modifies user relationships, more context on behavior and outcomes is needed.

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 description includes an 'Args' section that lists 'handle' as the parameter, adding meaning beyond the input schema (which has 0% description coverage). However, it doesn't explain what a 'handle' is (e.g., username, ID, format) or provide examples. With 1 parameter and low schema coverage, this adds some value but is insufficient for full clarity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the verb 'follow' and resource 'user', which provides a basic purpose. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_follows' or 'unfollow_user' beyond the obvious action difference, nor does it specify what platform or system this applies to. The purpose is clear but lacks differentiation from related tools.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication status), exclusions (e.g., cannot follow oneself), or compare it to siblings like 'get_follows' (for checking follows) or 'unfollow_user' (for reversing the action). Usage is implied by the name alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/gwbischof/bluesky-social-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server