Skip to main content
Glama
perforce

Perforce P4 MCP Server

Official
by perforce

modify_reviews

Manage code reviews by creating, updating, transitioning, or deleting them. Also supports adding comments, voting, and modifying participants.

Instructions

Create/update/delete reviews (WRITE permission)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoComment body (required for add_comment, reply_comment)
jobsNoAssociated job IDs for transition
actionYesReview modification action. To delete/obliterate review, use 'obliterate' action which requires approval
notifyNoNotification mode
cleanupNoPerform cleanup for approved:commit/committed transitions
versionNoReview version (optional for vote)
change_idNoChangelist ID (required for create, append_change, replace_with_change)
review_idNoReview ID (required for most actions except create, archive_inactive)
reviewersNoList of reviewers
comment_idNoParent comment ID (reply_comment, mark_comment_read/unread)
fix_statusNoJob fix status when transitioning
new_authorNoNew author username (update_author)
task_stateNoTask state
transitionNoTransition target state
vote_valueNoVote value
descriptionNoReview description (optional on create)
max_reviewsNoMaximum number of inactive reviews to archive (0 = no limit)
comment_versionNoReview version for comment attachment
new_descriptionNoNew review description (update_description)
comment_file_pathNoFile path for inline comment
comment_left_lineNoLeft diff line number for inline comment
not_updated_sinceNoISO date (YYYY-MM-DD) threshold for archive_inactive
comment_right_lineNoRight diff line number for inline comment
required_reviewersNoList of required reviewers
reviewer_group_namesNoList of reviewer group names
participant_user_namesNoList of participant usernames
participant_group_namesNoList of participant group names
reviewer_groups_requiredNoList of required reviewer groups
participant_users_requiredNoList of required participant usernames
participant_groups_requiredNoList of required participant groups

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'WRITE permission' and does not disclose side effects, error conditions, idempotency, or behavior for actions like 'obliterate' (which requires approval), leaving agent uninformed.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but at the expense of completeness. For a tool with 30 parameters and 22 actions, this is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description lacks context on how to choose among the many actions, required permissions beyond WRITE, and behavioral details. The tool is complex, and the description is too brief to be complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds no value for parameter semantics; it does not summarize key parameters or guide selection among the many parameters. Baseline 3 would be too generous given the complexity.

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 'Create/update/delete reviews (WRITE permission)', clearly indicating the verb and resource. However, it does not convey the full range of 22 different actions available (e.g., vote, transition, comment), making it slightly vague for the tool's actual scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like `modify_changelists` or `modify_jobs`. It mentions WRITE permission but lacks context on specific scenarios or prerequisites for individual actions.

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

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/perforce/p4mcp-server'

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