update_commentUpdate a comment's content by specifying its UUID and new Tiptap JSON.
Updates the content of a comment.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | New content as a Tiptap JSON string. | |
| comment_id | Yes | UUID of the comment. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It makes the mutation intent clear but does not state whether existing content is overwritten, whether permissions are required, whether the operation is reversible, or what happens if the provided content is invalid Tiptap JSON.
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 description is a single, focused sentence with no filler. The action and target are front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.
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 schema fully documents both required parameters and an output schema exists, so the tool is invocable for a simple operation. However, the lack of usage context, behavioral caveats, and any differentiation from sibling tools keeps it from being fully self-contained.
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 the parameter meanings are already fully documented. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline given full 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 clearly states a specific verb ('Updates') and resource ('content of a comment'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_comment or update_page without needing to inspect the schema.
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, no mention of prerequisites such as the comment already existing, and no exclusions or alternative tool suggestions. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.