Skip to main content
Glama

Update Ticket

update_ticket

Update a ticket in the markdown issue tracker: claim, resolve, or drop it, adjust dependency edges, add a comment, set triage, or check off acceptance criteria.

Instructions

Change one Ticket. Lifecycle: claim, resolve with a one-line gist, or drop with a reason — at most one of those per call. Graph: replace the Edges, refused if they close a cycle. Annotations: triage role, a comment, ticking acceptance criteria; these touch no part of the graph. Any of the three groups may accompany the others or stand alone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTicket id, or the <effort>#<order> handle of a Legacy Ticket.
dropNoClose the Ticket as work ruled out of scope.
rootNoWorkspace directory. Defaults to the session workspace.
tickNoAcceptance criteria to check off, matched on their text. Wrapped criteria match both as get_tickets returns them and re-joined onto one line. All references resolve before anything is written — one unmatched name fails the whole call and leaves the file untouched.
claimNoTake the Ticket. Fails if another holder already has it.
statusNoNot settable directly — use claim, resolve, or drop. Named here to say so.
triageNoSet the triage role. A separate field from status; neither touches the other.
commentNoAppend to the comment log, stored exactly as written.
resolveNoClose the Ticket as a step on the route.
blocked_byNoReplace the Edges outright, each a plain Ticket id resolved repo-wide. An empty list clears them. A cycle is refused.
Behavior5/5

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

It reveals that graph changes replace edges and are 'refused if they close a cycle', that annotation changes 'touch no part of the graph', and that lifecycle actions are exclusive within a call. These go beyond the readOnly/idempotent hints.

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?

Three sentences, zero fluff, structured with colon-separated labels. Front-loads the core purpose.

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 tool with 10 params and nested objects, the description covers the key behavioral categories and constraints. Combined with rich schema descriptions, it provides a complete operational picture; no output schema means no return-value explanation is needed.

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% with detailed per-parameter descriptions. The description adds high-level grouping (lifecycle, graph, annotations) and interaction rules, which enhances understanding without duplicating schema details.

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 'Change one Ticket', a specific verb-resource pair, and enumerates the three change groups (Lifecycle, Graph, Annotations), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_tickets and get_tickets.

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?

It explains the tool is for changing a single ticket and details constraints like 'at most one lifecycle per call' and 'Any of the three groups may accompany the others or stand alone.' It doesn't explicitly compare to siblings, but the usage context is clear.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/51ck/frontier-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server