RetailHardHat

Update Task Comment

update_task_comment

Destructive

Edit your own task comment. Cannot impersonate another author. MCP approval requirements are configurable by the organization administrator; business workflow approvals always apply.

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": {
      "taskId": "<taskId>",
      "commentId": "<commentId>",
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "update_task_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`taskId`	Yes
`commentId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare a non-read-only, destructive, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: ownership restriction, no impersonation, and organization-configurable MCP approval with business workflow approvals always applying. It does not explain overwrite/reversibility behavior, but adds valuable policy and permission information.

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?

The description is brief and front-loads the core action. The approval sentence is relevant policy context for a mutation, though it could be considered slightly boilerplate and is not integrated with the edit workflow details.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be described. However, for a destructive mutation with 0% schema description coverage, the description should do more to cover parameter expectations and the effect of editing an existing comment. It adequately covers ownership and approval constraints but leaves key invocation details implicit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It does not mention taskId, commentId, the nested data.message field, required fields, or the 1–10000 character message constraint. Parameter names provide some clue, but the description adds essentially no parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Edit your own task comment.' It distinguishes the operation from creating or deleting comments via the 'own' scope, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools such as update_task or delete_task_comment.

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?

It gives a clear constraint that the tool edits only the caller's own comment and cannot impersonate another author, which implies when it is valid. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like create_task_comment or update_task, nor does it state when not to use this tool beyond the ownership restriction.

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

All RetailHardHat tools Inspect

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

Need Help?