Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
was-fb-mcp

was-fb-mcp

by was-member-keramat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

fb_reply_comment

Publish a reply to a Facebook post or comment using target ID and message.

Instructions

Publish a reply or comment to a Facebook post or parent comment.

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": {
      "targetId": "<targetId>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "fb_reply_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYesComment text message
targetIdYesPost ID or Comment ID to comment on
accessTokenNoOptional Access Token (e.g. Page token)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.5

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects, permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens on failure (e.g., invalid targetId).

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded and efficient. However, it is overly minimal; a bit more detail would improve without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the low complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately states the basic purpose but lacks completeness. It would benefit from mentioning return format or confirming the action is irreversible.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, e.g., not explaining that targetId can be a post or comment ID or how accessToken is used.

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 'Publish a reply or comment to a Facebook post or parent comment' uses a specific verb (publish) and resource (reply/comment), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like fb_create_post (creates posts) and fb_get_post_comments (retrieves comments).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., fb_create_post for new posts). It lacks context about appropriate scenarios or prerequisites.

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