Skip to main content
Glama
makeplane

Plane MCP Server

Official
by makeplane

get_issue_comments

Retrieve all comments for a specific issue in Plane MCP Server by providing the project_id and issue_id as UUID parameters. Essential for detailed issue tracking and collaboration.

Instructions

Get all comments for a specific issue. This requests project_id and issue_id as uuid parameters. If you have a readable identifier, you can use the get_issue_using_readable_identifier tool to get the issue_id and project_id

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issue_idYesThe uuid identifier of the issue to get
project_idYesThe uuid identifier of the project to get issues for

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that performs a GET request to retrieve comments for the specified issue using the makePlaneRequest helper and returns the response as a JSON text content block.
    async ({ project_id, issue_id }) => {
      const comments = await makePlaneRequest(
        "GET",
        `workspaces/${process.env.PLANE_WORKSPACE_SLUG}/projects/${project_id}/issues/${issue_id}/comments`
      );
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(comments, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Input schema using Zod to validate project_id and issue_id parameters.
    {
      project_id: z.string().describe("The uuid identifier of the project to get issues for"),
      issue_id: z.string().describe("The uuid identifier of the issue to get"),
    },
  • Registration of the get_issue_comments tool on the MCP server, including name, description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool(
      "get_issue_comments",
      "Get all comments for a specific issue. This requests project_id and issue_id as uuid parameters. If you have a readable identifier, you can use the get_issue_using_readable_identifier tool to get the issue_id and project_id",
      {
        project_id: z.string().describe("The uuid identifier of the project to get issues for"),
        issue_id: z.string().describe("The uuid identifier of the issue to get"),
      },
      async ({ project_id, issue_id }) => {
        const comments = await makePlaneRequest(
          "GET",
          `workspaces/${process.env.PLANE_WORKSPACE_SLUG}/projects/${project_id}/issues/${issue_id}/comments`
        );
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: JSON.stringify(comments, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    );
  • Generic helper function to make authenticated HTTP requests to the Plane API using axios, used by the get_issue_comments handler.
    export async function makePlaneRequest<T>(method: string, path: string, body: any = null): Promise<T> {
      const hostUrl = process.env.PLANE_API_HOST_URL || "https://api.plane.so/";
      const host = hostUrl.endsWith("/") ? hostUrl : `${hostUrl}/`;
      const url = `${host}api/v1/${path}`;
      const headers: Record<string, string> = {
        "X-API-Key": process.env.PLANE_API_KEY || "",
      };
    
      // Only add Content-Type for non-GET requests
      if (method.toUpperCase() !== "GET") {
        headers["Content-Type"] = "application/json";
      }
    
      try {
        const config: AxiosRequestConfig = {
          url,
          method,
          headers,
        };
    
        // Only include body for non-GET requests
        if (method.toUpperCase() !== "GET" && body !== null) {
          config.data = body;
        }
    
        const response = await axios(config);
        return response.data;
      } catch (error) {
        if (axios.isAxiosError(error)) {
          throw new Error(`Request failed: ${error.message}`);
        }
        throw error;
      }
    }
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), which implies non-destructive behavior, but doesn't mention potential limitations like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. It provides basic context but lacks comprehensive behavioral details.

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 efficiently structured in two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides crucial usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with zero wasted words, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is reasonably complete. It covers purpose, parameter types, and alternative usage scenarios. However, it doesn't describe the return format (e.g., comment structure, ordering) or potential limitations, leaving some gaps for a read operation.

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%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters (project_id and issue_id as UUIDs). The description adds minimal value by repeating that parameters are UUIDs and mentioning the alternative tool for readable identifiers, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Get all comments') and resource ('for a specific issue'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_issue_comment (which creates comments) or get_issue_worklogs (which retrieves worklogs). It precisely defines the tool's function without ambiguity.

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?

The description explicitly provides when to use this tool (to get comments for a specific issue) and when to use an alternative (get_issue_using_readable_identifier if you have a readable identifier instead of UUIDs). This offers clear guidance on tool selection and prerequisites.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/makeplane/plane-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server