Self-archiving in Institutional Repositories (IRs) is playing a central role in the success of the Open Access initiatives. Deposited documents are more visible and probably they get more downloads and citations, but making them freely available in a local repository is not enough. Social tools, both public and academic targeting, networking or silo oriented, should be taken into account for reaching larger audiences and increase not only the scholarly but also the social impact. The paper explores the presence of IRs contents in 28 social tools (Academia, Bibsonomy, CiteUlike, CrossRef, Datadryad, Facebook, Figshare, Google+, GitHub, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Reddit, RenRen, ResearchGate, Scribd, SlideShare, Tumblr, Twitter, Vimeo, VKontakte, Weibo, Wikipedia All Languages, Wikipedia English, Wikia, Wikimedia, YouTube and Zenodo) using a webometric approach. We collected the link mentions of 2185 IRs in the cited tools during July 2017 from Google selected data centers. The results show that most of the IRs have no strong presence in the most specializes tools and even for the most popular services the figures are not high enough too. A candidate explanation for the low number of altmetric mentions is the lack of strategy in promotion of IRs contents and certain bad practices mostly regarding URL naming.