was-fb-mcp

fb_api

Execute any GET, POST, or DELETE request on Facebook Graph API endpoints directly. Pass the endpoint path, optional parameters, and token to interact with Facebook data.

Instructions

Universal Graph API tool. Execute any GET, POST, or DELETE request on Facebook Graph API endpoints directly.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "fb_api"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	No	JSON body payload for POST requests
`path`	Yes	API endpoint path (e.g. "me/friends", "v19.0/123456/photos")
`token`	No	Optional override Access Token (e.g., Page Access Token)
`method`	No	HTTP Method: GET, POST, or DELETE	GET
`params`	No	Query parameters object

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.5Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full burden. It fails to disclose critical behaviors like rate limits, authentication requirements, or that DELETE requests are destructive. Minimal transparency for a powerful tool.

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?

Very concise at two sentences, front-loaded with 'Universal Graph API tool'. However, it could be slightly more structured with bullet points for clarity.

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 no output schema and the tool's generic nature, the description should explain response format or common patterns. It also lacks warnings about destructive operations. Incomplete for safe agent usage.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptive names, so the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as schema already documents all parameters adequately.

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 it is a universal tool for executing GET, POST, DELETE requests on Facebook Graph API endpoints. It distinguishes from specific sibling tools like fb_create_post or fb_reply_comment by being a generic interface.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied as a generic fallback for any Graph API operation not covered by specialized tools, but no explicit when-to-use or when-to-avoid guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server