GitFlic MCP Server

gitflic_mr_discuss_reply

Destructive

Post a reply to a discussion thread on a merge request, enabling continued conversation within an existing MR discussion.

Instructions

Reply to a discussion thread on a merge request.

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": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "id": "<id>",
      "discussionUuid": "<discussionUuid>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "gitflic_mr_discuss_reply"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`raw`	No	Return the full, un-slimmed GitFlic response for THIS call (no token compression). Use when the default slim view dropped a field you need.
`message`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`discussionUuid`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The annotations already state readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so they already define this write's safety profile. The description repeats 'Reply' but, beyond the annotations, says nothing about whether replying re-opens a resolved thread, whether the reply is appended to the thread, what permissions or auth this requires, or what the tool returns. The description and the annotations do not contradict each other.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The single short sentence contains no waste and front-loads the action and the resource. It is concise, but also under-specified; that gap is better scored under completeness.

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?

This is a destructive write tool with no output schema, four of five parameters undocumented, and no partial-failure or return information. It should explain what the tool returns after the reply (comment ID, thread state) and what the identifiers must refer to.

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 coverage is only 20%: only 'raw' is documented, and the description adds nothing for project, id, discussionUuid, or message. The description does not clarify what the 'id' identifies (the merge request) or what format 'project' expects. With four undocumented required parameters, the description fails to make up for the thin schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource: reply to a discussion thread on a merge request. It lets an agent tell the tool apart from siblings such as gitflic_mr_discuss_delete or gitflic_mr_discuss_resolve. It never explains, however, how this tool differs from gitflic_mr_comment, which also writes to a merge request.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool rather than a plain comment, when to start a new discussion, or when to resolve or delete one. It also states no prerequisites, such as needing a discussionUuid that must already exist.

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

Deploy Server