Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MemAI

MemAI

by Filipe-Soares-de-Almeida
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

task_comment

Comment on a task or its items to record blockers, review notes, or context without changing the task's content.

Instructions

Comment on a task, or on one of its items when item names its id.

A comment never edits the task's content, so it carries what the checklist cannot: why an item is blocked, what a review said. Text an item is worked from -- its brief, a rule several items share -- is a task_note(); a comment that goes with a change of state goes in task_item()'s comment.

Free text cites another item only as [[#id]], which reads back as its current number and label; a label -- a title, an item's text -- never carries one. To a person, name it item n of its task.

Returns {"uid", "comment_id"}, plus item and n on an item.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYesthe task.
bodyYesthe comment.
itemNothe item's id; 0, the default, comments on the task itself.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changedv0.16.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / body / description
      Added value: +"the comment."
    • removedInput schema / properties / body / title
      Removed value: -"Body"
    • changedInput schema / properties / item / default
      Previous value: -""New value: +0
    • addedInput schema / properties / item / description
      Added value: +"the item's id; 0, the default, comments on the task itself."
    • removedInput schema / properties / item / title
      Removed value: -"Item"
    • changedInput schema / properties / item / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +"integer"
    • addedInput schema / properties / uid / description
      Added value: +"the task."
    • removedInput schema / properties / uid / title
      Removed value: -"Uid"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"task_commentArguments"
  2. Addedv0.6.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-destructive, non-idempotent write (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds real behaviour beyond that: a comment never edits task content, free text only cites other items via [[#id]], and labels never carry a citation. It does not state permanence/deletion or auth requirements, so it stops short of a 5.

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 core action, then structured into distinguishable clauses for alternatives, citation syntax, and return shape. Some phrasing is ornate ('reads back as its current number and label') but no sentence is purely decorative.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the return shape ({"uid", "comment_id"}, plus `item` and `n` on an item). Combined with the sibling routing and citation rules, an agent has what it needs; only permission/error behaviour is unstated.

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 still adds value the schema does not: `item` names an item's id (default 0 comments on the task), and `body` supports the [[#id]] citation form which reads back as the item's current number and label.

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?

Opening sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Comment on a task, or on one of its items'), and immediately differentiates from siblings by naming task_note() and task_item()'s `comment` as the alternatives for adjacent behaviour. An agent can place this tool without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit contrastive guidance: a comment is for rationale the checklist cannot carry, whereas item briefs/shared rules belong in task_note(), and comments accompanying a state change belong in task_item()'s `comment`. That is a true when/when-not/alternative map.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools