Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Easel

Easel

by nemodleo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

reply_comment

Post a reply to a specific comment on an Easel board, with an option to mark that comment resolved after responding.

Instructions

Reply to a comment (resolve=true replies and marks it resolved).

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>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "reply_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
textYes
authorNo
resolveNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the side effect of resolve=true (reply + mark resolved), which is useful, but omits permissions, return behavior, threading semantics, and the effect of resolve=false.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It is appropriately concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of omitting important details given the lack of structured documentation.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with four parameters, zero schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the required inputs, return value, or full behavioral implications, leaving the agent under-informed.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it only explains the 'resolve' parameter partially. The required 'id' and 'text' parameters and the optional 'author' parameter are left undocumented in both schema and description.

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 ('Reply') and resource ('comment'), making the core action clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like add_comment or resolve_comment, but the parenthetical hint about resolve provides some distinction.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_comment, resolve_comment, or list_comments. The parenthetical about resolve=true is a behavioral detail, not usage guidance, leaving the agent to infer context.

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