Skip to main content
Glama

skein_comment_update

Edit the body of a comment you authored. AUTHOR-ONLY — only the user who posted the comment may edit it (a different user, even a project owner, gets forbidden). expectedVersion is the optimistic-concurrency token: pass the version you last read on the comment; if it was edited by another writer in between you get version_conflict with the live currentVersion so you can re-read and retry. A write that instead lost a database serialization race (nothing written, no version moved) returns serialization_retry — retry the call verbatim, do not re-read first. Editing a deleted comment fails with a validation error. Authorship is never rewritten — the edit is recorded only in the comment.edited event actor. @mentions newly introduced by the edit fire the usual mention notification + auto-watch; mentions removed by the edit are left alone.

kind mirrors skein_comment (REQUIRED for agent callers): "directed" = the human told you to make this edit; "autonomous" = your own initiative. It does not change the comment's authorKind — it only classifies the mention fan-out for newly-introduced @mentions.

The response is the edited comment MINUS body, plus bodyOmitted:true — one key omitted, everything else returned untouched (same contract as skein_comment). You just supplied the text, and an echoed copy would stay in your context for the rest of the session. The post-edit version comes back, so a further edit chains straight off it. Read the body back with skein_comment_get or skein_show.

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": {
      "commentId": "<commentId>",
      "body": "<body>",
      "expectedVersion": "<expectedVersion>"
    },
    "name": "skein_comment_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesReplacement comment body (markdown). Non-empty after trim, <=100k chars.
kindNoEdit origin classification (REQUIRED for agent callers): "directed" = the human user told you to make this edit; "autonomous" = your own initiative. Cookie-session callers ignore this. Does not change the comment's authorKind.
commentIdYesUUID of the comment to edit.
expectedVersionYesThe comment version you expect (optimistic concurrency). Mismatch returns version_conflict with the live currentVersion.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and the description adds substantially beyond that: named error codes, the rule that authorship is never rewritten (edit only recorded in comment.edited actor), and mention fan-out behavior on newly introduced @mentions. It does not discuss rate limits or whether prior body text is recoverable after an edit.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and the author-only rule, then ordered by concern (errors, concurrency, semantics, response shape). It is long and dense, but nearly every sentence carries operational information; the rationale for omitting `body` from the response is slightly belabored.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly takes on the burden of explaining the return value (edited comment minus `body`, `bodyOmitted:true`, post-edit `version`). Combined with the error taxonomy, an agent has what it needs to call and recover; only output field details beyond those two are unexplored.

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

Parameters4/5

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 earns above baseline by explaining `expectedVersion` as an optimistic-concurrency token with the specific failure/retry loop, and by clarifying that `kind` does not alter authorKind and only classifies mention fan-out.

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 ("Edit the body of a comment you authored") plus a hard scope constraint (author-only). That immediately separates it from skein_comment (create) and skein_comment_get (read), which the description also references by name.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions (must be the author; project owners get `forbidden`), the exact retry protocol for `version_conflict` vs `serialization_retry`, and how to choose `kind` for directed vs autonomous edits. It never explicitly says "to post a new comment use skein_comment instead", so the routing guidance is strong but not fully exhaustive.

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.