Skip to main content
Glama

Comment on an application

add_comment

Adds a comment to an application, for the team (applicants never see comments). Earlier commenters are notified.

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": {
      "applicationId": "<applicationId>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "add_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesPlain text. Mention teammates as <@userId>, with user IDs from list_team; they're notified.
applicationIdYesThe application's ID, from list_applications.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare the generic mutation profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false). The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: the comment audience is internal only, and posting triggers notifications to earlier commenters — a side effect an agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

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?

Two short sentences with no waste. The core action comes first, then the visibility constraint and the notification side effect, each in a clause that earns its place.

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 2-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers audience, side effects, and mention-driven notifications. It omits what is returned (e.g., the new comment's ID) and permission requirements, but the essentials for correct invocation are present.

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 the schema already documents both parameters, including the <@userId> mention syntax. The description's notification remark reinforces the mention behavior but adds no new parameter-level detail; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Adds a comment to an application'. The verb 'adds' cleanly separates it from edit_comment and delete_comment siblings without needing to name them, though no sibling is explicitly called out.

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 implied by the verb and the visibility note ('for the team, applicants never see comments'), which tells the agent this is an internal-only channel. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or routing to edit_comment/delete_comment for other operations.

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.

Resources