Shortcut MCP Server

Update Story Comment

update_story_comment

Update the text of an existing comment on a Shortcut story. Provide the story ID, comment ID, and new text to revise the comment.

Instructions

Update the text of a comment on a Shortcut story.

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": {
      "story_id": "<story_id>",
      "comment_id": "<comment_id>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "update_story_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes
`confirm`	No	Must be CONFIRM_WRITE to execute
`dry_run`	No
`story_id`	Yes
`comment_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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 only states that the tool updates text; it does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, overwrite semantics, or the role of confirm and dry_run parameters. This is a mutation tool with no safety signals.

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 sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and object, making it very concise and readable.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given no output schema, no annotations, and a schema with required confirm/dry_run semantics, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to mention that confirm must be CONFIRM_WRITE, what dry_run does, or what happens on execution, making safe invocation impossible without external knowledge.

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 only 20% (only 'confirm' has a description). The tool description adds no parameter context beyond the word 'text,' leaving story_id, comment_id, dry_run, and confirm semantics mostly unexplained beyond their names.

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 uses the specific verb 'Update' and identifies the exact resource ('the text of a comment on a Shortcut story'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_story_comment, delete_story_comment, and list_story_comments.

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 such as create_story_comment or delete_story_comment. There is no mention of prerequisites, how to obtain comment_id, or scenarios where updating is appropriate.

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

Deploy Server