Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-confluence

mcp-confluence

by sirexelite
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Добавить комментарий

confluence_add_comment

Add a comment to a Confluence page in storage format. Specify the page ID and comment body to append feedback or notes.

Instructions

Добавляет комментарий к странице (storage-формат).

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": {
      "pageId": "<pageId>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "confluence_add_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesТекст комментария в storage-формате
pageIdYesID страницы

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions 'storage-формат' (storage format) but does not disclose required permissions, side effects, or whether the comment is immediately visible. This is insufficient.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very short (one sentence) and to the point, but it lacks structure and additional context that could help the agent. It is not verbose but could be improved with a bit more detail.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and the simplicity of the tool's purpose (2 required params), the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., needing edit permission on the page).

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (pageId, body). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the verb ('Добавляет' = adds) and the resource ('комментарий к странице' = comment to a page), and specifies the storage format. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like confluence_add_labels or confluence_create_page.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to add a comment versus using other page modification tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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