Skip to main content
Glama
Selenium39

Qiita API MCP Server

get_comment

Retrieve detailed information about a specific comment on the Qiita developer community platform using its unique comment ID.

Instructions

指定されたコメントの詳細情報を取得します

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commentIdYesコメントID

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the 'get_comment' MCP tool. It validates the input using commentIdSchema and executes by calling client.getComment(commentId).
    get_comment: {
      schema: commentIdSchema,
      execute: async ({ commentId }, client) => client.getComment(commentId),
    },
  • Zod schema used for input validation of the get_comment tool (and other comment tools). Defines commentId as a required string.
    const commentIdSchema = z.object({
      commentId: z.string(),
    });
  • MCP tool registration entry in the tools array. Provides the name, description, and JSON inputSchema for the get_comment tool.
    {
      name: 'get_comment',
      description: '指定されたコメントの詳細情報を取得します',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          commentId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'コメントID',
          },
        },
        required: ['commentId'],
      },
    },
  • Helper method in QiitaApiClient that performs the actual HTTP GET request to retrieve the comment details from the Qiita API.
    async getComment(commentId: string) {
      const response = await this.client.get(`/comments/${commentId}`);
      return response.data;
    }
Behavior2/5

Does 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. It states it 'retrieves' information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify if it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data, or handles errors. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 in Japanese that directly states the tool's function. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and has no wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured for its purpose.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a simple parameter, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'detailed information' includes, how errors are handled, or any behavioral traits. For a retrieval tool in a context with many siblings, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'commentId' documented as 'comment ID' in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the purpose as 'retrieves detailed information of a specified comment' which is clear but generic. It uses a specific verb ('retrieves') and resource ('comment'), but doesn't distinguish it from sibling tools like 'get_item_comments' or 'update_comment' that also involve comments. The purpose is understandable but lacks differentiation.

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. With siblings like 'get_item_comments' (for multiple comments) and 'update_comment' (for modifying), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. This leaves the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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/Selenium39/mcp-server-qiita'

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