Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SetLuca

SetLuca

Official
by setluca
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Run the comment automation suite

luca_campaigns_comment_simulation_suite_run
Destructive

Run the Instagram comment-to-DM simulation suite against a campaign and stamp the verdict on its draft, so comment-automation campaigns pass validation before publishing.

Instructions

Run the Instagram comment-to-DM simulation suite against a campaign and stamp its verdict onto the draft. Any campaign that uses comment automation has to pass it before it can publish, so run this before reaching for publish.

Luca operation: POST /api/campaigns/{id}/comment-simulation-suite Required scopes: campaigns:write Required OAuth scope: luca:queue_ops; data sensitivity: full_content Requires Idempotency-Key. Provide idempotencyKey for safe retries, or the server will generate one. Use workspaceId or workspaceSlug to override the default workspace configured by environment.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "luca_campaigns_comment_simulation_suite_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
workspaceIdNoOptional Luca workspace id override.
workspaceSlugNoOptional Luca workspace slug override.
idempotencyKeyNoStable key for safe retries. If omitted, the MCP server generates a unique key for this call.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
provenanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.2
    • removedInput schema / properties / body
      Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "autoSend": {
-      "default": false,
-      "type": "boolean"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.1
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "body"
-]New value: +[
+  "id"
+]
  3. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the mutation's side effect (a verdict is stamped onto the draft), the required scopes (campaigns:write, luca:queue_ops), full_content data sensitivity, and the idempotency-key requirement including server-side key generation when omitted. The idempotency note is consistent with idempotentHint=false, since each call without a supplied key gets a fresh key. It does not explain what a failing verdict does to the draft or whether the stamp is reversible.

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 behavioral summary is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by compact labeled lines for endpoint, scopes, idempotency, and workspace override. The scope and sensitivity lines read as generated boilerplate but each carries information an agent needs for a gated write.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, scoped write with an output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, authorization, idempotency, and workspace resolution. The only material omission is post-run behavior on a failed verdict, which an agent might need before chaining into publish.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 75%, and the description fills the main gap by framing the required `id` as the campaign the suite runs against. It also explains the retry semantics of `idempotencyKey` and the override purpose of `workspaceId`/`workspaceSlug`, which the schema already documents. The remaining value-add is modest but real.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb, resource, and effect: run the Instagram comment-to-DM simulation suite against a campaign and stamp its verdict onto the draft. It also scopes itself away from generic simulation and publishing tools by tying the operation to comment automation and the pre-publish gate.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

"Any campaign that uses comment automation has to pass it before it can publish, so run this before reaching for publish" gives a clear prerequisite and an explicit ordering against a named sibling. It stops short of saying when this is unnecessary or which generic simulation sibling to prefer for non-comment campaigns, so it is clear context rather than a full when/when-not matrix.

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