Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

atlassian-mcp__jira_list_issue_links

Read-only

List the links of a Jira issue: for each, its ID, type, the phrase that reads from this issue to the other one ("blocks", "is blocked by"), and the other issue's key, summary and status. Also returns the link types the site has, each with its name and its two phrases, which are what jira_link_issues takes.

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>"
    },
    "name": "atlassian-mcp__jira_list_issue_links"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoOptional email address of the connected account to use (e.g. 'user@gmail.com'). If omitted, the default account is used.
issue_keyYesThe issue key (e.g. PROJ-123)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's contribution is the return shape: per-link fields plus a site-wide link-type catalog with both directional phrases. That dual payload (issue-specific links plus global metadata) is non-obvious and useful. It doesn't mention empty-link behavior or any limits, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

One tightly packed sentence covers purpose, return fields, and the sibling relationship with no filler. The trailing clause "which are what jira_link_issues takes" is slightly awkward but earns its place by linking to the companion tool.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so field by field, which is exactly what an agent needs. The account parameter is left entirely to the schema, a minor gap for a two-parameter read tool.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters (account and issue_key), so the schema already does the explanatory work. The description references "this issue" without adding format or constraint detail beyond the schema's PROJ-123 example, so 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ("List the links of a Jira issue") and then enumerates exactly what each entry contains (ID, type, directional phrase, other issue's key/summary/status). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling write tool jira_link_issues by noting the link-type catalog is what that tool consumes.

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?

Usage context is clear: this is the way to discover available link types before calling jira_link_issues, since it returns "the link types the site has ... which are what jira_link_issues takes." It stops short of explicit when-not guidance (e.g., use jira_get_issue if you only need fields), but the alternative path is strongly implied.

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