Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bgl-mcp-server

bgl-mcp-server

by yuka-sakamaki777
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

backlog_add_comment

Add a comment to a Backlog issue by providing the issue key and message. Use this for reporting work plans or PR creation directly from your editor.

Instructions

Backlogの課題にコメントを追加します。作業計画やPR作成報告などに使用できます。

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": {
      "issueKey": "<issueKey>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "backlog_add_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYes投稿するコメント内容
issueKeyYes課題キー（例: EBC_101-25956）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'adds a comment' without disclosing behavioral traits like permissions, notifications, or idempotency. Lacks depth for a mutation tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with main action, no wasted words. Highly concise.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple 2-param tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains purpose and usage scenarios. Could mention error cases, but acceptable.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool adds a comment to a Backlog issue (specific verb+resource). It distinguishes from siblings like backlog_get_issue and backlog_get_comments.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides usage examples (work plans, PR creation reports) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. Implied usage only.

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