Add comment
add_commentAdd a comment to a card on a Focalboard board. Provide the board ID, card ID, and comment text.
Instructions
Add a comment to a card.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | ||
| cardId | Yes | ||
| boardId | Yes |
add_commentAdd a comment to a card on a Focalboard board. Provide the board ID, card ID, and comment text.
Add a comment to a card.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | ||
| cardId | Yes | ||
| boardId | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Add a comment' with no details on side effects, permissions, idempotency, or return behavior.
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?
Extremely concise but under-specified. A single sentence with 6 words omits essential details, crossing from conciseness into inadequacy.
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?
With 3 required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is vastly incomplete. It fails to explain the return value, prerequisites, or any behavioral details.
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?
The input schema has 0% description coverage and the tool description adds no information about parameters. The agent has no semantics for 'boardId', 'cardId', or 'text' beyond their names.
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 the verb ('Add') and resource ('comment to a card'), making the core purpose obvious. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'add_checklist_item' which also add content to a card.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as 'add_checklist_item'. The description gives no context for appropriate usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/giordano137/focalboard-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server