Drop2Run

Reopen a comment thread

reopen_comment

Idempotent

Opens a resolved comment thread on a site again, as its owner.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes	Subdomain or site id, from list_sites.
`thread`	Yes	Identifier of the thread, from list_comments.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Identifier of the thread, which reply_comment and resolve_comment take.
`url`	Yes	Opens the page at the thread.
`path`	Yes	The page it is on, or the document's path in a documents site.
`quote`	Yes	The words the commenter selected, or the text near a pin; use it to find the source.
`comments`	Yes
`outdated`	Yes	True when it was opened on an earlier version; the words it points at may have changed.
`resolved`	Yes	Whether it is resolved.
`selector`	Yes	The CSS selector of the element it is on.
`resolvedAt`	Yes	When it was resolved, ISO 8601, or null while open.
`resolvedBy`	Yes	Who resolved it, by name, or null while open.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / resolvedAt

Added value: +{
+  "description": "When it was resolved, ISO 8601, or null while open.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / resolvedBy

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Who resolved it, by name, or null while open.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "path",
-  "url",
-  "quote",
-  "selector",
-  "outdated",
-  "resolved",
-  "comments"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "path",
+  "url",
+  "quote",
+  "selector",
+  "outdated",
+  "resolved",
+  "resolvedBy",
+  "resolvedAt",
+  "comments"
+]

First observedOct 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (not read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds meaningful context beyond them: the thread must already be resolved, and the caller acts 'as its owner', implying an ownership/authorization requirement that the annotations do not convey.

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?

A single sentence with the action front-loaded and zero filler. Every clause (resolved state, site scope, owner identity) carries information.

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?

The tool is a simple two-parameter state mutation with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, so return values need not be described. The description covers the essential preconditions; only explicit routing to resolve_comment as the counterpart is missing.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), including where each value comes from (list_sites, list_comments). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb (opens/reopens) and resource (a resolved comment thread) plus scope (on a site), so an agent can tell it is the inverse of resolve_comment without opening the schema. It stops short of naming the sibling tool explicitly, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Usage is implied: it is for threads that are already resolved, and the 'as its owner' clause hints at a permission precondition. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus resolve_comment or reply_comment, and no stated exclusions or failure conditions.

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

All Drop2Run tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.