Skip to main content
Glama
jhl8041

Dooray MCP Server

by jhl8041
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

create-task-comment

Add comments to existing Dooray tasks to share progress updates, answer questions, log notes, or attach files with context; use it for discussion separate from editing the task body.

Instructions

Add a comment (댓글) to an existing Dooray task.

This tool creates a comment on a task, separate from editing the task body itself. Use this for:

  • Adding progress updates or status notes

  • Responding to questions or discussions

  • Logging information related to the task

  • Attaching files with context

When to Use:

  • create-task-comment: For adding discussion, updates, or notes (댓글)

  • update-task: For modifying the task description, title, or metadata

URL Pattern Recognition: When given a Dooray task URL like "https://nhnent.dooray.com/task/PROJECT_ID/TASK_ID":

  • Extract the first numeric ID after "/task/" as projectId

  • Extract the second numeric ID as taskId

File Attachments:

Content Format:

  • Use "text/x-markdown" for markdown formatting (recommended)

  • Use "text/html" for rich HTML content

  • Body format: {"mimeType": "text/x-markdown", "content": "..."}

Examples:

  • Simple comment: { "projectId": "123456", "taskId": "789012", "body": {"mimeType": "text/x-markdown", "content": "Progress update: Completed initial implementation"} }

  • With markdown: { "projectId": "123456", "taskId": "789012", "body": { "mimeType": "text/x-markdown", "content": "## Test Results\n\n- ✅ All unit tests passing\n- ✅ Integration tests passed\n- ⏳ Performance testing in progress" } }

  • With file attachments: { "projectId": "123456", "taskId": "789012", "body": {"mimeType": "text/x-markdown", "content": "See attached screenshots"}, "attachFileIds": ["file123", "file456"] }

Returns: Created comment with ID.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesComment content with format
taskIdYesTask ID to add comment to
projectIdYesProject ID where the task belongs
attachFileIdsNoArray of file IDs to attach (optional). Files must be uploaded first using the file upload API.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation/safety profile is known. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the attachment workflow requires uploading files first via the file upload API and then passing returned IDs, and it states the return shape ("Created comment with ID"). It does not cover permission requirements or failure modes, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Well structured and front-loaded: purpose, then routing decision, then URL parsing, then attachments, then format, then examples. The main cost is length — three example payloads where the first two differ only in content strings, which could be collapsed without losing information.

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?

Handles the tool's real complexity: a nested body object, a required format enum, an optional file-attachment path with a prerequisite step, and ID extraction from a URL. It also states the return value even though no output schema exists, so an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly on the first try.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is already 100%, so baseline would be 3; the description earns above baseline by explaining how to derive projectId and taskId from a Dooray URL, and by spelling out the body envelope shape with mimeType/content examples. The attachFileIds ordering constraint is also restated with operational meaning rather than just a type.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ("Add a comment to an existing Dooray task") and immediately separates it from the nearest alternative by noting it is "separate from editing the task body itself." An agent can distinguish this from update-task, update-task-body, and update-task-comment without opening any schema.

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?

Includes an explicit "When to Use" block contrasting create-task-comment (discussion, updates, notes) against update-task (description, title, metadata). It also enumerates concrete use cases (progress updates, answering questions, logging info, attaching files with context), leaving nothing to inference.

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