Skip to main content
Glama

Read a job's conversation

list_comments
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the conversation on one job: what people and agents have said about it, oldest first.

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": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "job": "<job>"
    },
    "name": "list_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jobYesThe job's key, e.g. FLAIR-12.
projectYesThe project's key, e.g. FLAIR.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this safe, idempotent, closed-world read, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine value by disclosing the ordering ('oldest first') and the mixed human/agent authorship, but says nothing about volume limits, pagination, or whether the full thread is always returned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with a colon-delimited clarification; every clause (subject, authorship, ordering) carries information and there is no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering the safety profile, the definition is nearly sufficient; ordering is stated and no output schema needs explaining. The only gap is any hint about result size or pagination for long conversations.

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% and both parameters carry their own examples, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only reinforces the single-job scope ('one job') without adding format or edge-case semantics beyond what is already documented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Read the conversation on one job') and clarifies the content covers both people and agents. It is clearly a read-one-resource tool, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with potentially overlapping siblings such as job_history or what_happened.

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 only implied by 'on one job' — the agent can infer it needs a job key and that this is the read counterpart to writing a note. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative for retrieving job-related history or activity.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.