Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Xodia

by ai.xodia
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List comments

list_comments
Read-only

Lists review comments people left on the site in Xodia, newest change first, as text: each thread's id, page, screen size (with the canvas width and which take_screenshot viewport to check it at), the element it is on (source, tag and text) or empty space, and every comment with its author. Open threads by default; status "archived" lists resolved ones. Narrow with route and breakpoint. Use it before and after work on a page, and check each comment at its own screen size. Each thread's link is for the user to open in Xodia. Answer with reply_to_comment; only a person resolves a thread.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>"
    },
    "name": "list_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
routeNoOnly threads on this page path, like /about
branchNoDefault: the branch the workspace has open, else the site's default branch
cursorNoFrom the previous answer, for older threads
statusNo"open" (default) or "archived" (resolved)
projectIdYesProject id from list_projects
breakpointNoOnly threads made at this screen size: "base" (Phone), "sm" (Large phone), "md" (Tablet), "lg" (Desktop), "xl" (Large desktop), "2xl" (Wide desktop)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real behavior beyond that: default-open filtering, newest-change ordering, and two important constraints — links are for the user to open in Xodia (not for the agent to fetch) and only a person resolves a thread (so the agent must not attempt archiving). It does not spell out pagination size or total counts, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Purpose and ordering come first, then behavior, then the alternative action — well front-loaded. The first sentence is a long run-on enumerating return fields, but each item earns its place given there is no output schema, so the cost is stylistic rather than wasted content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe returns, and it does so field by field, including what the element entry contains and where the link points. For a read-only, six-parameter listing tool with annotations already covering safety, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-tool meaning by tying screen size to 'which take_screenshot viewport to check it at' and instructing the agent to check each comment at its own screen size. The note that archived lists resolved threads and that route/breakpoint narrow results adds modest extra semantic value on top of the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Lists review comments people left on the site in Xodia'), states the ordering ('newest change first'), and enumerates the returned fields (thread id, page, screen size, element or empty space, author). It is clearly distinguishable from reply_to_comment and the other siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit workflow guidance ('Use it before and after work on a page'), filter guidance ('Narrow with route and breakpoint'), default behavior ('Open threads by default; status "archived" lists resolved ones'), and names the alternative action ('Answer with reply_to_comment; only a person resolves a thread').

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

All Xodia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources