Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Qiita MCP Server

Qiita MCP Server

by sunu-py-jp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_item_comments

Retrieve comments for a specific Qiita article to view discussions and user feedback on published content.

Instructions

List comments on a specific item (article)

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": {
      "item_id": "<item_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_item_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_idYesThe ID of the item

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose details like pagination, sorting, rate limits, or authentication needs. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized, clearly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output format, making it minimally viable for a list tool with low complexity.

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 the schema already documents the 'item_id' parameter. The description adds minimal context by specifying 'article' as the item type, but doesn't provide additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, aligning with the baseline for high coverage.

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 ('List') and resource ('comments on a specific item'), specifying it's for articles. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_comment_reactions' or 'get_comment', which might also involve comments, leaving some ambiguity in sibling differentiation.

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 'get_comment' (for a single comment) or 'list_comment_reactions' (for reactions on comments). The description implies usage for listing comments on an item but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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