Skip to main content
Glama

set_issue_status

Set the same status on one or more issues of the caller's account, by fingerprint from list_issues. To mark a defect fixed: call this with RESOLVED, and the next event on that issue reopens it as REGRESSED and sends a regression card. To suppress a known-harmless issue for good: call this with IGNORED, which is the status the app calls suppressing an issue, and the issue keeps counting events while staying out of the default list and out of every notification. To reopen an issue and bring it back under attention: call this with ONGOING. Takes 1 to 50 fingerprints; split a longer list across calls. Each issue is set on its own and every fingerprint comes back with an outcome: the status it now displays, NOT_FOUND when the account does not hold it, or ERROR when setting that one failed, and the rest are still set. To silence a whole service, environment, exception type or title instead of named issues: call manage_suppression_rule with action=create.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesRESOLVED, IGNORED or ONGOING
fingerprintsYesThe issue fingerprints (from list_issues), 1 to 50 of them; a single issue is a list of one

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Added
  8. Removed
  9. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / fingerprint
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "The issue fingerprint (from list_issues)",
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • addedInput schema / properties / fingerprints
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The issue fingerprints (from list_issues), 1 to 50 of them; a single issue is a list of one",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "fingerprint",
      -  "status"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "fingerprints",
      +  "status"
      +]
  10. Added
  11. Removed
  12. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: RESOLVED causes future events to reopen as REGRESSED and send a regression card; IGNORED keeps counting events but suppresses notifications and default-list appearance; ONGOING reopens. It also discloses partial-failure semantics: each fingerprint returns an outcome such as NOT_FOUND or ERROR, and remaining issues are still set. This goes well beyond what the schema or annotations reveal.

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 long but dense and every sentence serves a purpose. It front-loads the core operation and then layers status-specific behavior, constraints, failure semantics, and the relevant alternative. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is exceptionally complete. It covers purpose, the meaning and consequences of each status, fingerprint limits, partial-failure behavior, return outcomes, and the alternative tool for broader suppression. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema: it explains what each status value means behaviorally, clarifies that fingerprints come specifically from list_issues, and notes the same status is applied to all supplied issues. It also clarifies the outcome format for each fingerprint, which helps the agent interpret responses even though there is no output schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Set the same status on one or more issues of the caller's account, by fingerprint from list_issues.' It clearly differentiates this tool from related tools like manage_suppression_rule by explicitly listing what it operates on (named issues) and what it is not for (service/environment/exception-type level suppression).

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit use-case guidance for each status value (RESOLVED, IGNORED, ONGOING) and names the exact alternative tool and action for suppression at a broader scope: 'call manage_suppression_rule with action=create.' It also addresses list-length limits by directing callers to split longer lists. This is strong when-to-use vs. alternative guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources