Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

notion-mcp__notion_get_comments

Read-only

Reads the open comments on one Notion page or block. Each comment is reduced to id, discussion_id (comments in one thread share it), created_time, created_by (a name, or an id when Notion gives no name), text and parent. Resolved comments are not returned by Notion's API. The result is {results, has_more, next_cursor}, with the same shape when there are no results. has_more true means more results exist than this page holds, and next_cursor is the cursor argument that returns them.

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": {
      "block_id": "<block_id>"
    },
    "name": "notion-mcp__notion_get_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cursorNoThe next_cursor value from an earlier call with the same arguments. Returns the page of results after that one. Absent for the start of the list.
accountNoOptional email address of the connected account to use (e.g. 'user@gmail.com'). If omitted, the default account is used.
block_idYesThe page or block's Notion id, with or without dashes, or a Notion URL that contains it (the id is read from the URL).
page_sizeNoHow many results one call returns, from 1 to 100. Default 50. A full page comes back with has_more true and a next_cursor for the rest.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds real behavioral detail: the exact fields each comment is reduced to, the fallback in created_by when Notion supplies no name, the resolved-comment omission, and the empty-result shape. It does not mention auth or rate-limit considerations, but for a read-only list call the remaining gaps are small.

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 is front-loaded in the first sentence and each following sentence carries a distinct fact (field list, resolved exclusion, result envelope, paging). The paging sentence duplicates what the schema already says about cursor and page_size, which is the only slack in an otherwise tight definition.

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 carries the burden of describing returns, and it does so precisely: {results, has_more, next_cursor}, the same shape when empty, and what next_cursor feeds into. For a four-parameter read-only list tool, an agent has everything needed to call it and consume the response.

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 block_id, cursor, page_size and account are all already documented, and the description largely restates that has_more/next_cursor define the cursor to pass back. This is useful reinforcement of the paging contract but adds little meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case.

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 ("Reads the open comments on one Notion page or block") and pins the scope to a single page/block. That is enough to separate it from notion_create_comment, notion_update_comment and notion_delete_comment without inspecting any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a clear condition for use (open comments on one page/block) and an explicit exclusion (resolved comments are not returned by Notion's API), which prevents a futile search. It does not name alternative tools, such as reading page content via notion_get_page, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All DataToRAG toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources