Skip to main content
Glama

github_issues_list_comments_for_repo

List issue comments for a GitHub repository with options for sorting, direction, and pagination.

Instructions

List issue comments for a repository

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ownerYesowner
repoYesrepo
sortNoThe property to sort the results by.
directionNoEither `asc` or `desc`. Ignored without the `sort` parameter.
sinceNoOnly show results that were last updated after the given time. This is a timestamp in [ISO 8601](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601) format: `YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ`.
per_pageNoThe number of results per page (max 100). For more information, see "[Using pagination in the REST API](https://docs.github.com/rest/using-the-rest-api/using-pagination-in-the-rest-api)."
pageNoThe page number of the results to fetch. For more information, see "[Using pagination in the REST API](https://docs.github.com/rest/using-the-rest-api/using-pagination-in-the-rest-api)."
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, or filtering. The input schema includes parameters for these, but the description adds no extra context.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words. However, it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

There is no output schema, no annotations, and the description is minimal. It fails to specify whether comments are listed across all issues or for a specific issue, leaving important context unclear given the tool's complexity.

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%, with all parameters described in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already provided, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the tool's action and resource: 'List issue comments for a repository'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'github_issues_list_comments' which likely lists comments for a specific issue, leaving ambiguity about scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the large number of sibling tools, such context is essential for correct selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Eyalm321/github-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server