Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
substack-mcp

substack-mcp

by nanameru
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

schedule_draft

Schedule a draft to publish at a specified future date and time using its ID and ISO 8601 datetime.

Instructions

Schedule a draft to publish at a future datetime.

Args: post_id: Draft ID. iso_datetime: ISO 8601 datetime, e.g., '2026-05-15T09:00:00+09:00' for JST or '2026-05-15T00:00:00Z' for UTC.

Returns: {post_id, scheduled_for}

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": {
      "post_id": "<post_id>",
      "iso_datetime": "<iso_datetime>"
    },
    "name": "schedule_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
post_idYes
iso_datetimeYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether scheduling overwrites existing schedule, permission requirements, or side effects. The description is minimal.

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 concise with a clear structure (what, args, returns), though the Args/Returns format adds minor verbosity; it is front-loaded and 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?

Given no output schema, the description includes return value details. However, it lacks behavioral context and usage guidance, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds full meaning to both parameters beyond the schema: explains post_id as Draft ID and provides explicit ISO 8601 datetime format examples, compensating for 0% schema coverage.

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 tool schedules a draft to publish at a future datetime, distinguishing it from siblings like publish_draft (immediate) and unschedule_draft (cancel).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; it only describes the action without context of when to choose it over similar tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools