Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
huly-mcp-selfhost

huly-mcp-selfhost

by JoKeks2023
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

list_comments

Read-only

List comments on a Huly issue with their IDs, newest first. Set a limit to control result count or enable full mode to read long comments without shortening.

Instructions

List comments of an issue (with ids)

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": {
      "identifier": "<identifier>"
    },
    "name": "list_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fullNoDo not shorten long comments
limitNoNewest n
workspaceNo
identifierYesIssue id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.5.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safety profile, so the description only needs to add operational context. It offers nothing about ordering, pagination, what "shortened" comments mean, or what the response contains beyond the vague "(with ids)".

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?

It is a single short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The parenthetical is the only questionable element, since it is terse to the point of being unclear.

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?

For a four-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description should at least explain the limit-based pagination behavior and what the truncation flag affects. As written, an agent cannot tell how results are ordered or what the returned records look like.

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 75%, with identifier, limit, and full documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; the only undocumented parameter, workspace, is left unexplained in both places.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("List comments") and scopes it to an issue, which separates it from siblings like add_comment or list_issues. It does not explicitly contrast with any sibling, and the parenthetical "(with ids)" is ambiguous about whether ids are an input or part of the response.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent must infer from the phrase "of an issue" that this tool is for reading an issue's comment thread, but nothing tells it how this differs from list_thread, changes_since, or listing other issue sub-resources.

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