Skip to main content
Glama
bestpractical

mcp-server-rt

Official

add_comment

Destructive

Add an internal comment to a ticket, keeping it hidden from the requestor. Attach files or log work time while updating the ticket.

Instructions

Add an internal comment to a ticket (not visible to the requestor)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTicket ID
ContentNoComment text (optional if Attachments provided)
TimeTakenNoMinutes of work time to log
AttachmentsNoFiles to attach. Provide either FilePath (local file path, server reads and encodes it) or FileContent (pre-encoded MIME Base64). FileName and FileType are optional with FilePath and are inferred from the path.
ContentTypeNoContent MIME type (default text/plain)
CustomFieldsNoTicket custom field values to set while adding this comment, as {CF_name: value}. Each value replaces everything the field currently holds, so for a multi-value field pass an array of the complete set you want ({"Tags": ["Red", "Blue"]}) — to add to existing values, read them with get_ticket first and include them. RT silently ignores names it does not recognize, including transaction custom fields (not supported here), so a success response does not confirm a field was set. Use get_queue_fields to see the custom fields available on the ticket's queue.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / CustomFields
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Ticket custom field values to set while adding this comment, as {CF_name: value}. Each value replaces everything the field currently holds, so for a multi-value field pass an array of the complete set you want ({\"Tags\": [\"Red\", \"Blue\"]}) — to add to existing values, read them with get_ticket first and include them. RT silently ignores names it does not recognize, including transaction custom fields (not supported here), so a success response does not confirm a field was set. Use get_queue_fields to see the custom fields available on the ticket's queue.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the behavioral nuance that the comment is not visible to the requestor. It does not contradict annotations. The description does not disclose other side effects (e.g., logging time, updating custom fields), though these are partially covered in the schema. It adds some value beyond annotations but not extensive behavioral context.

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 sentence of ten words, with the key distinction (internal vs. requestor-visible) front-loaded immediately after the action. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 tool with 6 parameters, nested attachment objects, and custom-field semantics, the description is brief, but the schema is richly detailed and fully covers parameter behavior. Annotations handle the mutation warning. The main missing element is return-value behavior, since there is no output schema, but that is a minor gap for a comment-adding operation.

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% parameter description coverage, including detailed notes on Content, TimeTaken, Attachments, and CustomFields. The description itself does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no additional parameter meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given complete schema coverage.

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 names a specific action ('Add an internal comment') and a clear resource ('to a ticket'), and the parenthetical '(not visible to the requestor)' immediately distinguishes it from the sibling tool add_reply. There is no ambiguity about what operation this tool performs.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly signals when to use this tool (for internal, non-requestor-visible comments) by explicitly stating the visibility characteristic. It implies that add_reply would be the alternative for visible comments, though it does not explicitly name that sibling or state exclusion criteria.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bestpractical/mcp-server-rt'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server