Skip to main content
Glama
bruhsb
by bruhsb

paperclip_list_approval_comments

Read-only

Retrieve comments on an approval request to review feedback before resubmitting. Returns paginated items with author details.

Instructions

List comments on an approval request.

Args:

  • approvalId: string — Approval UUID (example: "apr_abc123")

Returns: Pagination envelope { items: Comment[], total, count, offset, limit, has_more, next_offset }. Each item: id, body, authorId, authorType, createdAt.

Examples:

  • Use when: reading board feedback before resubmitting an approval

  • Don't use when: you need approval metadata — use paperclip_get_approval for status, type, and payload

Error Handling:

  • 401: authentication failed → check PAPERCLIP_API_KEY

  • 404: approval not found → verify ID with paperclip_list_approvals

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
approvalIdYesApproval UUID
limitYesMax comments per page (1–100, default 50)
offsetYesNumber of comments to skip (default 0)
response_formatYesOutput format: 'markdown' (default, human-readable) or 'json' (structured)markdown
Behavior5/5

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

Adds detailed return structure (pagination envelope) and error handling (401, 404) beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. No contradictions.

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?

Very concise and well-structured: purpose, Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers all necessary aspects: return format, pagination, error codes, and usage examples. No output schema required since return is explained.

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% with good descriptions. The description does not add extra semantic details for parameters beyond what is already in the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states 'List comments on an approval request' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'paperclip_add_approval_comment' and 'paperclip_get_approval'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' examples, including a direct alternative: 'use paperclip_get_approval for status, type, and payload'.

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/bruhsb/paperclip-mcp'

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