blogger-mcp-toolkit

blogger_comments_removeContent

Remove a comment's content, replacing it with an admin notice while preserving the comment record.

Instructions

Remove comment content, replacing it with an admin notice, without fully deleting the comment object.

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": {
      "blogId": "<blogId>",
      "postId": "<postId>",
      "commentId": "<commentId>"
    },
    "name": "blogger_comments_removeContent"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`blogId`	Yes	The unique identifier of the blog.
`postId`	Yes	The unique identifier of the post.
`commentId`	Yes	The unique identifier of the comment to remove content from.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.3Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the key behavioral outcomes: content is replaced with an admin notice and the comment object persists. It does not mention permissions or reversibility, but the core mutation behavior is clearly stated.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and its caveats without any unnecessary words. It is perfectly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple three-parameter mutation tool, the description explains the primary effect and distinguishes it from deletion. However, it does not describe the return value or any required permissions, which leaves minor operational gaps.

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 each parameter having a generic 'unique identifier' description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, 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.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Remove comment content') and clearly identifies the resource and outcome, including replacing with an admin notice and not fully deleting the comment object. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like blogger_comments_delete.

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 implies the use case: to redact content while preserving the comment object, and contrasts with deletion ('without fully deleting the comment object'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, making it clear but not fully explicit.

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