Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

resolve_comment_thread

Destructive

Mark an entire comment thread, including its root and replies, as resolved to close out design feedback discussions.

Instructions

Mark a whole thread (root + replies) as resolved.

Free door, tiered answer — Free: On the designs you keep · Pro: ✓ · Business: ✓ · Enterprise: ✓.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "thread_id": "<thread_id>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_comment_thread"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
thread_idYesThe thread's id: the ``thread_id`` on any of its comments (a root comment's own ``comment_id``).
resolved_byNoWho resolved it. On Kiln's servers the signed-in account is always used and this is ignored; elsewhere, omitted means the caller's account if Kiln knows it, else none.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / resolved_by / description
      Added value: +"Who resolved it.  On Kiln's servers the signed-in account is always used and this is ignored; elsewhere, omitted means the caller's account if Kiln knows it, else none."
    • addedInput schema / properties / thread_id / description
      Added value: +"The thread's id: the ``thread_id`` on any of its comments (a root comment's own ``comment_id``)."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, destructive mutation. The description adds useful scope detail that the whole thread is affected, but it does not explain reversibility, permissions, or what "resolved" changes beyond the annotation signal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is front-loaded and efficient. The second sentence about tier availability is ambiguous marketing-style text that does not earn its place in an invocation-focused description.

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 low-complexity two-parameter mutation with rich schema descriptions and annotations, the description is mostly complete: it states the action and scope. It could be stronger by routing agents away from reopen_comment_thread or explaining the resolved state, but it is adequate overall.

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%, and the schema already documents thread_id and resolved_by in detail. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Mark a whole thread (root + replies) as resolved." It clarifies the scope includes root and replies, but it does not distinguish this from sibling tools such as reopen_comment_thread or get_comment_thread.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The tier availability line does not help an agent decide when to invoke it.

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