Skip to main content
Glama

Add comment

jira_add_comment

Add a comment to a Jira issue using plain text, markdown, or ADF, and optionally limit visibility to a project role or group.

Instructions

Add a comment to one issue. body takes plain text (converted to ADF) or a raw ADF document; format: "markdown" parses a string body as the markdown subset. visibility restricts the comment to a single project role or group by name; omit it and everyone who can see the issue can read the comment. Mentions need the accountId form — jira_search_users resolves a name.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesPlain text (converted to ADF) or a raw ADF document.
applyNoSet true to EXECUTE this write. Omit (or false) to get a plan of the request that would be sent. Executing also requires the server to run with JIRA_WRITE_MODE=apply.
issueYesIssue key (PROJ-123) or numeric issue id.
formatNoHow to interpret a string rich-text input: "text" (default — blank lines split paragraphs, single newlines are hard breaks) or "markdown" (the documented subset: headings, lists, code fences, bold/italic/code, links). Refused alongside a raw ADF document.
plan_idNoThe single-use id returned by the preceding plan-mode call. Required together with apply: true; a mismatch means the arguments changed since the plan, and the write is refused rather than executed.
profileNoNamed credential profile for this call. Omit to use the active profile. Rejected when the server locks the profile (JIRA_LOCK_PROFILE).
visibilityNoRestrict the comment to one project role or one group, by name.
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the annotations: plain text is converted to ADF, the markdown format parses a subset, visibility defaults to all viewers of the issue, and mentions require the accountId form. The annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent write, so no contradiction exists.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, with each subsequent sentence covering a distinct behavior: body handling, visibility, and mentions. There is no filler or tautology.

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 schema already documents all seven parameters in detail, including the apply/plan_id plan-mode flow. The description covers the subtle semantics (ADF conversion, visibility default, mention format) needed to call the tool correctly. It doesn't mention return values or permission requirements, but these are less critical for this write operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining the visibility default when omitted and the accountId requirement for mentions, though the core body/format details are already present in the schema.

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 opening phrase 'Add a comment to one issue' states a specific verb and resource, and the verb 'Add' clearly differentiates it from sibling comment tools like jira_update_comment, jira_get_comments, and jira_delete_comment. The rest of the description reinforces scope by focusing on comment creation behavior.

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 gives clear context by explaining how a comment is added and explicitly points the agent to jira_search_users for resolving mention names. It doesn't state when to prefer this tool over jira_update_comment or jira_get_comments beyond the verb itself, but the prerequisite guidance for mentions is useful.

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/IvanBBaev/jira-mcp'

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