Skip to main content
Glama

get-issue-comments

Retrieve comments for an issue in Autodesk Construction Cloud projects to track discussions and resolve problems.

Instructions

Retrieves a list of comments associated with an issue in Autodesk Construction Cloud.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYes
issueIdYes

Implementation Reference

  • The async callback function implementing the core logic of the 'get-issue-comments' tool: authenticates, fetches issue comments using IssuesClient, and formats the response.
    callback: async ({ projectId, issueId }) => {
        // TODO: add pagination support
        const accessToken = await getAccessToken(["data:read"]);
        const issuesClient = new IssuesClient();
        projectId = projectId.replace("b.", ""); // the projectId should not contain the "b." prefix
        const comments = await issuesClient.getComments(projectId, issueId, { accessToken})
        if (!comments.results) {
            throw new Error("No comments found");
        }
        return {
            content: comments.results.map((comment) => ({ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(comment) }))
        };
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters for the tool: projectId and issueId as non-empty strings.
    const schema = {
        projectId: z.string().nonempty(),
        issueId: z.string().nonempty()
    };
  • src/server.ts:12-14 (registration)
    Dynamic registration of all tools (including 'get-issue-comments') to the MCP server using a loop over imported tools from './tools/index.js', calling server.tool with title, description, schema, and callback.
    for (const tool of Object.values(tools)) {
        server.tool(tool.title, tool.description, tool.schema, tool.callback);
    }
  • src/tools/index.ts:8-8 (registration)
    Re-export of the getIssueComments tool from its implementation file, allowing bulk import in src/server.ts.
    export { getIssueComments } from "./get-issue-comments.js";
  • Complete tool object definition for 'get-issue-comments', including title, description, schema reference, and handler callback.
    export const getIssueComments: Tool<typeof schema> = {
        title: "get-issue-comments",
        description: "Retrieves a list of comments associated with an issue in Autodesk Construction Cloud.",
        schema,
        callback: async ({ projectId, issueId }) => {
            // TODO: add pagination support
            const accessToken = await getAccessToken(["data:read"]);
            const issuesClient = new IssuesClient();
            projectId = projectId.replace("b.", ""); // the projectId should not contain the "b." prefix
            const comments = await issuesClient.getComments(projectId, issueId, { accessToken})
            if (!comments.results) {
                throw new Error("No comments found");
            }
            return {
                content: comments.results.map((comment) => ({ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(comment) }))
            };
        }
    };
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 of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a retrieval operation, implying it's likely read-only and non-destructive, but doesn't confirm this explicitly. It lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or error handling. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. It could be slightly more structured by separating context, but it avoids redundancy and stays focused. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's scope.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 required parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover parameter meanings, behavioral traits, or return values, leaving critical gaps for an AI agent to use the tool effectively. The description alone is insufficient for reliable operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no descriptions for the two parameters. The tool description doesn't compensate by explaining what 'projectId' and 'issueId' represent, their format, or how to obtain them. This leaves parameters semantically undefined, hindering correct invocation.

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 clearly states the verb ('retrieves') and resource ('list of comments associated with an issue'), making the purpose unambiguous. It specifies the context ('in Autodesk Construction Cloud'), which helps distinguish it from generic comment-fetching tools. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-issues' or 'get-issue-root-causes', which prevents a perfect score.

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 alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing issue), compare it to sibling tools (e.g., 'get-issues' for issue details vs. this for comments), or specify use cases (e.g., for reviewing discussion threads). This leaves the agent with minimal context for tool selection.

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/petrbroz/aps-mcp-server'

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