Skip to main content
Glama

Onplana

by io.github.Onplana
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

create_issue

File a new Issue (PMBOK Issue Log: a problem that has already happened and needs triage). Use this - NOT create_task - for bugs, blockers, and materialized problems. projectId is OPTIONAL: omit it to file an organization-level ("General") issue when you do not know which project it belongs to. type: OPERATIONAL/TECHNICAL/SCHEDULE/RESOURCE/BUDGET/SCOPE/QUALITY/EXTERNAL/OTHER. severity: LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH/CRITICAL. Optionally link a materializing risk, a fix-task, or a change request. Starts in OPEN. Returns the new issue's id, issue (id, title, status) and url (its link in the Onplana web app).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes
titleYes1-500 chars.
ownerIdNoOptional user id who owns triage.
severityYes
companyIdNoOptional. The client who reported this, when a client did. Omit for internally-found issues.
projectIdNoOptional. The project the issue belongs to; omit for an org-level (General) issue.
linkedCrIdNoOptional ChangeRequest.
descriptionNoOptional detail, up to 10000 chars.
linkedRiskIdNoOptional ProjectRisk this materialized from.
linkedTaskIdNoOptional fix-Task.
targetResolutionAtNoOptional ISO datetime target.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / companyId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. The client who reported this, when a client did. Omit for internally-found issues.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Project the issue belongs to."New value: +"Optional. The project the issue belongs to; omit for an org-level (General) issue."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "title",
-  "type",
-  "severity"
-]New value: +[
+  "title",
+  "type",
+  "severity"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent), so the burden is lighter. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the issue starts in OPEN status, and the return payload (id, issue object, url) is described. It doesn't mention permission requirements or duplicate-creation behavior, keeping it short of 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?

Information-dense with no filler and the key routing rule (use this not create_task) is front-loaded. The enum lists make it slightly list-heavy, but every sentence carries unique, useful information.

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 an 11-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical optional-parameter semantics and describes the return shape itself. A few parameters (targetResolutionAt, ownerId, companyId, description) are left to the schema, which is reasonable given 82% coverage.

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 82%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by spelling out the type and severity enums, the projectId omit-for-General semantics, and the optional risk/task/change-request linkage purpose. This meaningfully complements rather than repeats the 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?

States a specific verb (File) and resource (a new Issue) and anchors it to PMBOK Issue Log semantics as 'a problem that has already happened and needs triage'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling create_task, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use and when-not: 'Use this - NOT create_task - for bugs, blockers, and materialized problems', plus a conditional rule for omitting projectId to file an org-level General issue. This is directly actionable routing guidance.

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

All Onplana toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources