Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

atlassian-mcp__jira_add_worklog

Log time spent on a Jira issue. Takes the issue key, the time in Jira's duration format ("1h 30m", "2d", "45m"), and optionally when the work started and a comment. Returns the worklog Jira stored: its ID, author, time spent in Jira's words and in seconds, start time and comment. Jira adjusts the issue's remaining estimate as it does for time logged in its own interface. A time that is not a Jira duration is refused before anything is sent.

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": {
      "issue_key": "<issue_key>",
      "time_spent": "<time_spent>"
    },
    "name": "atlassian-mcp__jira_add_worklog"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoOptional email address of the connected account to use (e.g. 'user@gmail.com'). If omitted, the default account is used.
commentNoA comment on the worklog (plain text, will be converted to ADF)
startedNoWhen the work started, as an ISO date and time (e.g. 2026-10-19T09:00:00Z). Defaults to now
issue_keyYesThe issue key (e.g. PROJ-123)
time_spentYesTime spent, in Jira's duration format: weeks, days, hours and minutes, e.g. "1h 30m", "2d", "45m"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: the write goes through Jira's normal estimate adjustment, the stored worklog is returned with its ID and times, and non-duration input is rejected client-side before any network write. It does not address permissions or whether an existing estimate is overwritten versus reduced.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the action statement, then inputs, then return shape, then the estimate side effect and validation. No filler, though the return-value sentence partially duplicates what the input section already implies and could be tightened.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a five-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the accepted input formats, the returned worklog fields, the estimate side effect, and the failure mode. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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%, so every parameter is already documented, including the duration format and ISO start time that the description echoes. The description restates the two required inputs and the two optional ones but adds no constraint the schema lacks, and never mentions the 'account' parameter. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Log time spent on a Jira issue') and implicitly distinguishes itself from the read-side sibling jira_list_worklogs. The agent knows exactly what the tool does without opening the schema.

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?

Usage context is only implied: the mention of Jira duration format hints that the caller needs a valid duration, and the description lists what it takes. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or note about alternatives such as jira_update_issue, which can also touch estimates.

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

All DataToRAG toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources