Skip to main content
Glama
TykanN

Swit MCP Server

by TykanN

swit-message-comment-create

Add comments to messages in Swit workspaces to provide feedback, ask questions, or share information directly within conversations.

Instructions

Create comment on message

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
message_idYes
contentYes
body_typeNoplain
assetsNo
external_asset_typeNo

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'swit-message-comment-create' tool. It validates the input arguments using MessageCommentCreateArgsSchema and delegates to SwitClient.createMessageComment.
    export const handleMessageCommentCreate = async (switClient: SwitClient, args: any) => {
      const validatedArgs = MessageCommentCreateArgsSchema.parse(args);
      return await switClient.createMessageComment(validatedArgs);
    };
  • Zod schema defining the input arguments for creating a message comment: requires message_id and content, optional body_type, assets, external_asset_type.
    export const MessageCommentCreateArgsSchema = z.object({
      message_id: z.string(),
      content: z.string(),
      body_type: z.enum(['plain', 'markdown']).default('plain').optional(),
      assets: z.record(z.any()).optional(),
      external_asset_type: z.string().optional(),
    });
  • Tool metadata registration including name, description, and input schema (converted to JSON schema for MCP).
    {
      name: 'swit-message-comment-create',
      description: 'Create comment on message',
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(MessageCommentCreateArgsSchema),
    },
  • Maps the tool name to its handler function within the coreHandlers factory.
    'swit-message-comment-create': (args: any) => handleMessageCommentCreate(switClient, args),
  • The SwitClient method that performs the actual API call to create a message comment via POST to /api/message.comment.create.
    async createMessageComment(
      args: MessageCommentCreateArgs
    ): Promise<MessageCommentCreateResponse> {
      const response = await this.client.post('/api/message.comment.create', args);
      return response.data;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action 'Create' but lacks details on permissions, side effects, rate limits, or response format. This is inadequate for a mutation tool, as it doesn't inform the agent about potential impacts or requirements beyond the basic operation.

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 'Create comment on message' is extremely concise with no wasted words, making it front-loaded and easy to parse. It efficiently conveys the core action in a single phrase, earning full marks for brevity and clarity in structure.

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 the complexity of a mutation tool with 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain behavioral traits, parameter meanings, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate effectively in this context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description adds no information about parameters like 'message_id', 'content', 'body_type', 'assets', or 'external_asset_type', failing to compensate for the coverage gap. This leaves the agent guessing about parameter meanings and usage.

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 'Create comment on message' clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'comment on message', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'swit-message-create' or 'swit-message-comment-list', which would require more specificity to earn a perfect score.

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. For example, it doesn't explain when to create a comment versus a message (using 'swit-message-create') or how it relates to listing comments ('swit-message-comment-list'), leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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/TykanN/swit-mcp'

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