comment_listList Drupal comments by entity type and ID with pagination controls, so AI assistants can retrieve site feedback for moderation, review, or analysis.
List comments.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| entity_id | No | ||
| page_limit | No | ||
| entity_type | No | ||
| page_offset | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: no ordering, no pagination behavior, no filtering semantics for the optional entity scoping, no approval-state behavior. One sentence that only names the operation leaves every behavioral question open.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The single sentence is not bloated, but it is under-specified rather than concise: there is no information to front-load and no structure. Brevity here comes at the cost of usability.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, for a four-parameter tool with zero annotation coverage and zero schema documentation, the description should at minimum explain the entity scoping and paging behavior; it explains nothing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description explains none of the four parameters. The crucial pair entity_id and entity_type (both nullable, default null) is completely undefined — an agent cannot tell whether omitting them lists everything or returns nothing.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
"List comments" restates the tool name (comment_list) and title (Comment List) almost verbatim, which the rubric defines as tautology. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling listing tools such as comment_thread_list, or from comment_get, so an agent gets no signal about which comment-listing entry point to pick.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no stated preconditions. The agent is left to guess whether this lists all site comments, comments on one entity, or approved comments only.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.