Skip to main content
Glama

Submit a challenge code

verify_account_challenge

Submit a checkpoint challenge code to continue an Instagram login paused by verification, using the checkpoint URL and partial session from the login job result.

Instructions

Submit a challenge code. Required API key scope: accounts:write. POST /accounts/verify-challenge Continues a login that hit an Instagram checkpoint. checkpointUrl and partialSession come from the login job result. Malformed bodies yield 500.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "verify_account_challenge"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesJSON request body.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds useful operational context beyond that: required API key scope 'accounts:write', the underlying POST endpoint, and that malformed bodies return a 500 error.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the action, auth scope, endpoint, usage context, and one relevant failure mode without unnecessary wording.

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 non-idempotent mutation with a nested body and no output schema, the description covers the key preconditions, source of required values, auth scope, and a notable error case. It could be slightly more complete by indicating what a successful call returns or changes, but the essential invocation context is present.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the body structure. The description adds meaningful provenance for key fields by explaining that `checkpointUrl` and `partialSession` come from the login job result, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Submit a challenge code') and places it in a concrete flow: continuing a login that hit an Instagram checkpoint. This distinguishes it from siblings like verify_account_2fa and get_login_status.

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?

It clearly says when to use the tool: after a login hits an Instagram checkpoint, using values from the login job result. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives such as verify_account_2fa, but the checkpoint context makes the intended scenario clear.

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