Excaliself

Resolve comment

resolve_comment

Idempotent

Mark a comment thread as resolved once its request is complete, or reopen it to make it visible again on the canvas.

Instructions

Resolves a comment thread when what it asks for is done, or reopens it. Resolved threads are hidden on the canvas by default.

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": {
      "threadId": "<threadId>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`resolved`	No	false reopens the thread. Default true.
`threadId`	Yes	A threadId from list_comments.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.11.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real state-effect context beyond the schema — resolved threads are hidden on the canvas by default — which tells the agent the visible consequence of the call.

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 short sentences, effect front-loaded, no filler. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 2-parameter, non-destructive toggle with no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger, and visible outcome. Only minor gaps remain, such as permission requirements, which are not critical here.

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 coverage is 100% and the 'resolved' parameter is already documented as 'false reopens the thread. Default true.' The description's phrase 'or reopens it' restates that without adding format, default, or edge-case detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 — 'Resolves a comment thread ... or reopens it' — which is clearly distinct from add_comment, reply_to_comment, and list_comments. It stops short of explicitly naming siblings, so it is a strong 4 rather than a 5.

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?

It gives a concrete condition for use: 'when what it asks for is done,' plus the inverse action ('or reopens it'). There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative, but the trigger is unambiguous for a two-state toggle tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.