Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nilyo

by com.nilyo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Facebook / Messenger: List comment replies

facebook_list_comment_replies
Read-onlyIdempotent

List one page of replies; preserve the post/comment pair.

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": {
      "post_id": "<post_id>",
      "comment_id": "<comment_id>"
    },
    "name": "facebook_list_comment_replies"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNoOpaque next_cursor from the previous page of this same account, identity and resource. No offset pagination.
post_idYesFull Facebook post.id (<author_id>_<post_id>) from facebook_list_user_posts or facebook_get_post. Not a URL, text or author ID alone.
account_idNoOwned Facebook unipile_account_id from list_connected_accounts. Not a Facebook person or Page ID. Required when several Facebook accounts exist.
comment_idYesNumeric comment.id from facebook_list_post_comments or facebook_list_comment_replies, paired with that post_id. Not comment text or post ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful trait beyond them – that results are paginated ('one page') – but says nothing about the page size cap, cursor requirements, or account scoping, which matters for a paginated read.

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?

Two short clauses, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the key constraint. It is efficient, though 'preserve the post/comment pair' is terse to the point of being ambiguous about what the caller must actually do.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a paginated, account-scoped read with a 10-item limit and a conditional account_id, and none of that is surfaced in the description. With no output schema, the description also gives no indication of what a page contains or how the cursor is returned, leaving the caller to infer pagination behavior entirely from the schema.

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 80% and the schema already explains post_id, comment_id, cursor and account_id formats in detail. The description only echoes the post_id/comment_id pairing rule, adding no format, origin, or constraint information beyond what the schema states.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The verb+resource ('List ... replies') is present, but the resource is only identifiable via the title/name – the description itself never says 'Facebook comment replies' or names the comment resource. It does not distinguish itself from facebook_list_post_comments or linkedin_list_comment_replies, both of which sit adjacent in the sibling list.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus facebook_list_post_comments (top-level comments) or facebook_reply_to_comment (writing a reply). The phrase 'preserve the post/comment pair' hints at a prerequisite but is not framed as guidance, and no exclusions are given.

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

All Nilyo 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