Skip to main content
Glama
garc33

Bitbucket Server MCP

by garc33
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_comments

Retrieve only the comments from a pull request. Use this when you specifically want to read the discussion and feedback comments without other activities like reviews or commits.

Instructions

Retrieve only the comments from a pull request. Use this when you specifically want to read the discussion and feedback comments without other activities like reviews or commits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
prIdYesPull request ID to get comments for.
limitNoMaximum number of activities to return per page (default: 25, max: 100).
startNoPage offset (0-based). Use nextPageStart from a previous response to fetch the next page.
projectNoBitbucket project key. If omitted, uses BITBUCKET_DEFAULT_PROJECT environment variable.
fetchAllNoWhen true, fetches all pages and returns the complete comment history. Recommended for PRs with many comments.
repositoryYesRepository slug containing the pull request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / fetchAll
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "When true, fetches all pages and returns the complete comment history. Recommended for PRs with many comments.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Maximum number of activities to return per page (default: 25, max: 100).",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / start
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Page offset (0-based). Use nextPageStart from a previous response to fetch the next page.",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully clarifies that the result set is filtered to comments only, excluding reviews and commits, but says nothing about read-only safety guarantees, pagination/fetchAll behavior, rate limits, or return shape — gaps the schema only partially covers.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core action stated first and the usage condition immediately after. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple read tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers what it returns and when to choose it. Pagination and defaulting behavior (project env fallback, limit/start) live in the schema, so nothing critical is missing, though the return format is left implicit.

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%: all six parameters (prId, limit, start, project, fetchAll, repository) are documented inline, including pagination semantics and the fetchAll recommendation. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (comments from a pull request) and explicitly narrows scope with 'only the comments,' which distinguishes it from the sibling tools that return mixed activity streams (get_activities, get_reviews). An agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition: 'when you specifically want to read the discussion and feedback comments without other activities like reviews or commits.' The alternatives are named by category (reviews, commits) rather than by tool name (get_reviews, get_activities), so routing is clear but not fully explicit.

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