Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Backlog MCP Server

Backlog MCP Server

by nulab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

add_pull_request_comment

Adds a comment to a Backlog pull request using its number and repository details, with optional user notifications. Use it to post review notes, status updates, or questions directly on a PR.

Instructions

Adds a comment to a pull request

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": {
      "number": "<number>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "add_pull_request_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
numberYesPull request number
repoIdNoRepository ID
contentYesComment content
repoNameNoRepository name
projectIdNoThe numeric ID of the project (e.g., 12345)
projectKeyNoThe key of the project (e.g., 'PROJECT')
notifiedUserIdNoUser IDs to notify

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.15.1
  2. Removedv0.13.1
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv0.11.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / organization
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional organization name. Use list_organizations to inspect available organizations.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. Changed7 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The numeric ID of the project (e.g., 12345)",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / projectIdOrKey
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Project ID or project key",
-  "type": [
-    "string",
-    "number"
-  ]
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectKey
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The key of the project (e.g., 'PROJECT')",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / repoId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Repository ID",
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / repoIdOrName
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Repository ID or name",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / repoName
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Repository name",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "projectIdOrKey",
-  "repoIdOrName",
-  "number",
-  "content"
-]New value: +[
+  "number",
+  "content"
+]
  5. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation, and the description's "Adds" is consistent with that. However, the description adds no further behavioral context such as notification effects or permission requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's apparent simplicity.

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?

The schema fully documents the parameters and the annotations cover safety behavior, so the description is minimally sufficient. It does not explain the notification parameter's effect or clarify when this should be used instead of related comment tools, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 all seven parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 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 states a specific verb and resource: "Adds a comment to a pull request." This clearly distinguishes it from sibling operations such as get_pull_request_comments, update_pull_request_comment, and add_issue_comment.

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?

The description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The intended use is only implied by the tool name and one-line description.

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