Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Milanote MCP Server and API by Cotlet

by dev.cotlet
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete comment

delete_comment
Destructive

Delete a comment you wrote, for everyone. Removes your own comment from its thread; the thread and other people's comments stay. There is no trash for comments, so it cannot be brought back. By default you confirm each call; you can switch that off for this tool. Waits for the owner's approval.

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": {
      "board_id": "<board_id>",
      "comment_id": "<comment_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
board_idYesBoard ID from list_boards, or the board URL.
comment_idYescomment_id from get_board (include_comments) or add_comment.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds substantive context they don't carry: no trash/recycle bin exists for comments, the deletion is irreversible, sibling comments and the thread survive, and there is a confirmation prompt by default plus an owner-approval wait. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before invoking an irreversible mutation.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with scope and consequence, then the safety/confirmation behavior. No filler and no repetition of what the schema or annotations already state verbatim.

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 irreversible mutation with annotations covering safety and no output schema, this is nearly complete: scope, side effects, irreversibility, and confirmation flow are all present. It omits what happens on a denied approval or when the comment belongs to someone else (error vs. silent skip), a small but real gap for an agent planning a retry or fallback.

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 description coverage is 100%, and both parameters (board_id, comment_id) already document their provenance (list_boards, get_board with include_comments, add_comment). The description adds no additional meaning about the parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a comment"), plus the exact scope restriction ("you wrote, for everyone"). It also distinguishes itself from the nearest alternative behavior — comments have no trash, unlike the card tools in the sibling list — so an agent can tell it apart from edit_comment without opening either 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?

"Delete a comment you wrote" establishes the precondition, and "the thread and other people's comments stay" clarifies the effect versus deleting a whole thread or card. It also notes the default per-call confirmation and that it can be disabled for this tool. It never explicitly names edit_comment as the alternative when the user only wants to change text, which keeps it from a 5.

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

All Milanote MCP Server and API by Cotlet 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