Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@illodev/taiga-mcp

@illodev/taiga-mcp

by illodev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

taiga_task_comment_delete

Delete a comment from a Taiga task by providing the task ID and comment ID. This tool removes unwanted or outdated comments to keep project discussions clean and accurate.

Instructions

Delete a comment from a task.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "comment_id": "<comment_id>"
    },
    "name": "taiga_task_comment_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYestask ID
comment_idYesComment ID (from history)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete a comment from a task' without mentioning irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens if the comment or task does not exist. This is a meaningful gap for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is a single sentence that is directly front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is necessary and there is no fluff or redundant content.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter delete tool with full schema coverage, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks any behavioral context (e.g., irreversibility) or usage guidance, and there is no output schema to clarify the response, leaving the description just barely adequate.

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 both parameters (id as task ID and comment_id as Comment ID from history) are already documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and the resource 'a comment from a task', clearly stating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling comment deletion tools by specifying the resource type (task vs. userstory or issue).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like taiga_userstory_comment_delete and taiga_issue_comment_delete exist, but the description does not mention that this is specifically for task comments or provide any exclusion criteria.

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