Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

atlassian-mcp__jira_list_worklogs

Read-only

List the time logged on a Jira issue. Returns each worklog's ID, author, time spent in Jira's words and in seconds, start time and comment as plain text, with the number of worklogs and the total time in seconds.

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_worklogs"
  }
}

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)
max_resultsNoMaximum number of worklogs to return (default 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries most of the burden and does so well by enumerating the returned fields (ID, author, time in Jira's words and seconds, start time, comment as plain text, count, total seconds). It does not disclose pagination behavior, whether the total covers all worklogs or only the returned page, or any permission requirement for viewing worklogs.

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 tight sentences: purpose first, return shape second. Every clause carries information and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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's field-level return summary is exactly what an agent needs and it is provided. The remaining gap is truncation semantics — max_results defaults to 100 but the description never says whether the count/total reflect the page or the whole issue, which matters for a paged list.

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%, so all three parameters (account, issue_key, max_results) are already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about parameter behavior — not what happens above max_results nor how account selection interacts with the results — so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

"List the time logged on a Jira issue" gives a specific verb (List) and a specific resource (worklogs for one issue), which cleanly separates it from the sibling jira_add_worklog write tool. It stops short of naming any sibling or stating scope limits (e.g. one issue only, not project-wide), so a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives (e.g. jira_get_issue for issue fields, jira_add_worklog for writing time). The use case is inferable from the purpose sentence alone, but nothing in the description helps an agent decide between this and adjacent read tools.

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