Skip to main content
Glama
bim-ba

ycli

by bim-ba
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Delete Tracker issue comment

tracker_comments_delete
Destructive

Permanently deletes one comment from a Yandex Tracker issue using its issue_key and comment_id. Get comment_id from comments_list; deletion is irreversible.

Instructions

Permanently delete one comment from a Tracker issue (irreversible).

Get comment_id from comments_list. Returns an acknowledgement on success.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issue_keyYesIssue key, e.g. QUEUE-123.
comment_idYesComment id (numeric ``id`` or ``longId``), from ``comments_list``.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.122.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / comment_id / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / comment_id / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • addedInput schema / properties / issue_key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Issue key, e.g. QUEUE-123.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / key
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Issue key, e.g. QUEUE-123.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "key",
-  "comment_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "issue_key",
+  "comment_id"
+]
  2. First observedv0.67.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false; the description reinforces this with "Permanently ... (irreversible)" and adds the single-item scope plus the return behavior ("Returns an acknowledgement on success"), which matters since no output schema exists. It omits any permission or authorization constraints.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the destructive/irreversible consequence front-loaded before the id-sourcing hint.

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 two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, irreversibility, and return acknowledgement. The remaining gap is any mention of required permissions or what happens on a nonexistent/already-deleted comment.

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%, so both issue_key and comment_id are already documented, including the note that comment_id is numeric id or longId from comments_list. The description's pointer to comments_list merely restates the schema, adding no new semantics, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Permanently delete one comment from a Tracker issue") and scopes it to a single comment. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the very similarly named sibling tracker_entities_comments_delete, which likely deletes the same class of object.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives one concrete prerequisite for invocation: obtain comment_id from comments_list. It offers no guidance on when deletion is appropriate versus siblings such as tracker_comments_update or tracker_entities_comments_delete, so usage is only implied.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools