list_postsRetrieve social media posts with optional caption and status filters plus pagination to review drafts, scheduled, published, or failed content.
List posts with optional filters and pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | Caption substring filter | |
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| status | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that structured data: no note on ordering, default page size, total counts, or what a broad openWorld query might return, leaving real behavioral gaps for a listing tool.
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?
A single short, front-loaded sentence with no padding, but its brevity stems from under-specification rather than efficiency. It could afford a clause on scope or pagination defaults.
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 4-parameter, open-world listing tool with no output schema and 25% schema coverage, the description omits essential invocation context: pagination mechanics (offset/limit semantics, defaults, cap), result ordering, and whether results are scoped to a connected account. Too much must be guessed.
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 description coverage is only 25%: q is documented as a caption substring filter, but limit, offset, and status are bare (only max/min and an enum). The description's 'optional filters and pagination' does not compensate, giving no defaults, no max page guidance (limit caps at 100), and no filter behavior.
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 name/description pair states a clear verb+resource (list posts), so the basic action is unmistakable. However, the qualifier 'optional filters and pagination' just restates properties of the input schema, and nothing distinguishes this from get_post or the many other list_* siblings or clarifies scope (account-scoped? workspace-wide?) as openWorldHint implies.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus get_post, get_post_analytics, or list_comments, and no mention of preconditions such as needing a connected account. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.