API reference · Profiles
Rename profile
PATCH /v1/profiles/{id}
Rename a profile. The id is unchanged, so connected channels and posts are untouched, but the slugified identifier moves with the name. The response reports `previousUsername` and `usernameChanged` so anything addressing the profile by its old name can be updated.
Request
Authenticate with a bearer API key. Agents calling over MCP authorise with OAuth instead and never handle the key.
curl -X PATCH https://api.postlake.dev/v1/profiles/{id} \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $POSTLAKE_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"name":"…"}'Body
| Field | Type | Required | What it is |
|---|---|---|---|
name | string | Yes |
Response
Renamed (200).
| Field | Type | Required | What it is |
|---|---|---|---|
profile | object | No | |
previousUsername | string | No | |
usernameChanged | boolean | No |
Example
{
"profile": "…",
"previousUsername": "…",
"usernameChanged": false
}Limits
Write operations are limited per account, and rate-limit responses include Retry-After. Do not automatically retry a write unless this operation explicitly documents idempotency.
Calling this from an agent
Agents do not call REST. They call tools. Over the hosted MCP server this operation is list_profiles, and the agent authorises with OAuth so your API key is never pasted into a chat or seen by the model. The reply comes back in the same normalised shape you see above, which is what lets an agent reason about it without a per-network branch.
You control what any one agent may do with it: which brands it may act for, which networks it may reach, how much it may do in a day, and whether it may spend credits you bought up front. See the MCP server.
Errors
Every failure uses one shape: a stable type, a granular code, the field at fault in param, and a plain-language fix. An agent can act on it without a person reading the message. See Errors and retries.
Idempotency-Key.Common questions
Can an AI agent do this without the REST API?
Yes. Over MCP the same job is the list_profiles tool. The agent authorises with OAuth, so no API key is pasted into a chat or seen by the model, and the answer comes back in the same normalised shape.
Is it safe to retry this call?
Do not automatically repeat a write after a timeout unless that endpoint explicitly documents idempotency. First read the resulting state; a second request could repeat the action.
What happens when it fails?
You get one error shape: a stable type, a granular code you can branch on, the offending field in param, and a fix written so an agent can correct itself rather than stop. Full list on Errors and retries.