Fast.io

comment

Destructive

Comments on files: add/list/delete/react, anchor to image regions, A/V timestamps, PDF pages, or text selections. Call action='describe' for the full action/param reference. Destructive: delete, bulk-delete. Verbosity (detail param): list/list-all default to terse (compact rows). details defaults to full (drill-down). Pass an explicit detail='standard'|'full' to override (best-effort — may be a silent no-op until the comments API honors output=; see describe).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sort`	No	Sort: 'created' or '-created' (default newest first).
`text`	No	Max 8192 body / 500 DISPLAY text (mention markup discounted) — the 500 usually BINDS. Both count CHARACTERS — CJK and emoji cost one each, same as ASCII. Mentions count toward 8192 only. A separate 2048-BYTE budget applies to the JSON-encoded `reference` anchor, where each non-ASCII character costs SIX bytes.
`emoji`	No	Single emoji character.
`limit`	No	Page size 2-200.
`action`	Yes	Operation. Use 'describe' for full action reference.
`detail`	No	Per-comment verbosity for list/list-all/details. Defaults: terse for list/list-all (compact rows), full for details (drill-down). See action='describe' for per-level field lists.
`offset`	No	Offset for pagination.
`node_id`	No	Storage tree node opaque ID. Both files and folders are nodes — use this name regardless of which.
`share_id`	No	Alias for profile_id when the profile is a share — implies profile_type=share (so profile_type may be omitted).
`reference`	No	Anchor: image region, A/V timestamp, PDF page, or text selection.
`comment_id`	No	Comment opaque ID.
`context_id`	No	Alias for profile_id (either name works)
`profile_id`	No	Polymorphic context ID (pair with profile_type=workspace\|share). Typed aliases let you omit profile_type: workspace_id (⇒ workspace) / share_id (⇒ share); also context_id. 19-digit profile ID.
`properties`	No	Arbitrary key-value JSON object metadata (edit action only). Accepts a native object or a JSON string. Merged into the comment's stored properties; server-managed keys (reactions, version, version_hash, edited_at, content_filtered, mentions) supplied here are ignored.
`comment_ids`	No	Array of comment opaque IDs.
`context_type`	No	Alias for profile_type (either name works)
`profile_type`	No	Profile type.
`workspace_id`	No	Alias for profile_id when the profile is a workspace — implies profile_type=workspace (so profile_type may be omitted).
`display_limit`	No	list-all only — ignored on the markdown list action. Number of comments to return to the agent (default 10, max 200). Backend page_size unchanged for cache warmth (JSON only). Trims post-fetch only.
`include_total`	No	Include total count in response.
`reference_type`	No	Filter by anchor type.
`include_deleted`	No	Include soft-deleted.
`parent_comment_id`	No	Parent comment ID for reply (single-level threading).

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: explicitly stating 'Destructive: delete, bulk-delete' and disclosing that the detail override is 'best-effort — may be a silent no-op until the comments API honors output='. This goes beyond the annotations but doesn't fully describe all behaviors, making 4 appropriate.

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?

The description is compact yet information-dense, covering purpose, action discovery, destructive behavior, and verbosity controls in just a few sentences. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and every sentence contributes, with no fluff or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (23 parameters, 10 actions, nested reference objects), the description does a good job by summarizing scope, pointing to action='describe' for full details, and covering key behavioral nuances. It doesn't explain return values or the full reference structure, but the schema and describe action compensate, so a 4 is fair.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of parameter semantics via the verbosity discussion (detail defaults), but this is already present in the schema's detail parameter description. No significant new parameter meaning is introduced, so the baseline score stands.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Comments on files: add/list/delete/react' and explicitly mentions anchoring to image regions, A/V timestamps, PDF pages, or text selections. This specific verb+resource pairing distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which relate to comments.

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?

The description provides clear usage context, such as calling action='describe' for the full reference and explaining verbosity defaults for list/list-all vs details. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Fast.io tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool covers a clearly distinct domain (auth, storage, shares, comments, events, AI, etc.), and overlapping concepts like share vs. fileshare are explicitly disambiguated with deprecation notes and cross-references. An agent can reliably select the correct tool for a task without ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are all lowercase single words, but they mix nouns (user, org, workspace) with verbs (download, find, upload) and include a hyphenated 'how-to'. There is no consistent verb_noun or noun-only pattern, though the names are still readable and memorable.

Tool Count4/5

19 tools is slightly above the typical 3-15 sweet spot, but the platform's breadth (auth, file management, sharing, collaboration, AI, metadata, and help) justifies this count. Each tool represents a substantial domain area, so none feel redundant.

Completeness5/5

The toolset provides full lifecycle coverage for the platform: authentication, user/org/workspace management, file storage/upload/download/search, sharing (both quickshare and durable file shares), comments, events, metadata pipelines, AI assistance, and product help. No obvious dead ends or missing operations are apparent.

Resources

Need Help?