Skip to main content
Glama

pylon_update_issue_followers

Manage issue followers in Pylon by adding or removing users to track support tickets and ensure relevant team members stay informed about updates.

Instructions

Add or remove followers from an issue

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe issue ID
add_user_idsNoUser IDs to add as followers
remove_user_idsNoUser IDs to remove as followers

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler method that performs the HTTP POST request to the Pylon API endpoint `/issues/${id}/followers` to update issue followers.
    async updateIssueFollowers(
    	id: string,
    	data: { add_user_ids?: string[]; remove_user_ids?: string[] },
    ): Promise<SingleResponse<{ success: boolean }>> {
    	return this.request<SingleResponse<{ success: boolean }>>(
    		'POST',
    		`/issues/${id}/followers`,
    		data,
    	);
    }
  • src/index.ts:453-476 (registration)
    Registers the MCP tool 'pylon_update_issue_followers' with input schema and thin wrapper handler that delegates to PylonClient.
    server.tool(
    	'pylon_update_issue_followers',
    	'Add or remove followers from an issue',
    	{
    		id: z.string().describe('The issue ID'),
    		add_user_ids: z
    			.array(z.string())
    			.optional()
    			.describe('User IDs to add as followers'),
    		remove_user_ids: z
    			.array(z.string())
    			.optional()
    			.describe('User IDs to remove as followers'),
    	},
    	async ({ id, add_user_ids, remove_user_ids }) => {
    		const result = await client.updateIssueFollowers(id, {
    			add_user_ids,
    			remove_user_ids,
    		});
    		return {
    			content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
    		};
    	},
    );
  • Zod input schema defining parameters for the tool: issue id, optional arrays of user ids to add or remove as followers.
    {
    	id: z.string().describe('The issue ID'),
    	add_user_ids: z
    		.array(z.string())
    		.optional()
    		.describe('User IDs to add as followers'),
    	remove_user_ids: z
    		.array(z.string())
    		.optional()
    		.describe('User IDs to remove as followers'),
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Add or remove' implies mutation, it doesn't specify permissions required, whether changes are reversible, error conditions (e.g., invalid user IDs), or what happens when adding users already following. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward mutation tool and front-loads the core action.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens on success/failure, return values, or important behavioral aspects like whether both add and remove operations occur atomically. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters but doesn't compensate for missing operational context.

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 description coverage is 100%, with clear parameter documentation in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what's already in the schema (e.g., format of user IDs, whether arrays can be empty). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Add or remove') and target resource ('followers from an issue'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from other issue-related tools like pylon_get_issue_followers (read-only) and pylon_update_issue (general updates), though it doesn't explicitly mention these siblings in the description.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pylon_update_issue (which might handle follower updates differently) or pylon_get_issue_followers (for checking current followers). There's no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases for managing followers.

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/JustinBeckwith/pylon-mcp'

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