Post a new comment or reply to an existing thread in the community by providing content and an optional parent comment ID.
Post a new comment in the community.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | The comment content | |
| parent_id | No | Parent comment ID if replying to a comment |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.2.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Post' implies a write operation, but there is no information about permissions, moderation, side effects, or what happens to the data afterward.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The single sentence is front-loaded with the core action and wastes no words. It could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but it is well-structured for a simple tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is simple with only two parameters and full schema coverage, and no output schema exists. However, the description omits that the tool can be used to reply to comments (via parent_id) and provides no behavioral context, leaving some gaps for an agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what is already provided, which meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb ('post') and resource ('comment') with a clear scope ('in the community'). It does not, however, distinguish this from sibling tools like update_comment or delete_comment, nor does it mention that it can post replies.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any prerequisites or exclusions. The implied usage is simply to add a comment, but the description provides no explicit context or comparison to siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.