Skip to main content
Glama

Update Form Answers

jira_update_proforma_form_answers
Destructive

Update Jira form field answers using the Forms REST API. Specify question IDs, answer types, and values to modify form data. Note: For DATETIME fields, use direct custom field updates instead to preserve time components.

Instructions

Update form field answers using the Jira Forms REST API.

This is the primary method for updating form data. Each answer object must specify the question ID, answer type, and value.

⚠️ KNOWN LIMITATION - DATETIME fields: The Jira Forms API does NOT properly preserve time components in DATETIME fields. Only the date portion is stored; times are reset to midnight (00:00:00).

Workaround for DATETIME fields: Use jira_update_issue to directly update the underlying custom fields instead:

  1. Get the custom field ID from the form details (question's "jiraField" property)

  2. Use jira_update_issue with fields like: {"customfield_XXXXX": "2026-01-09T11:50:00-08:00"}

Example:

# Instead of updating via form (loses time):
# jira_update_proforma_form_answers(issue_key, form_id, [{"questionId": "91", "type": "DATETIME", "value": "..."}])

# Use direct field update (preserves time):
jira_update_issue(issue_key, {"customfield_10542": "2026-01-09T11:50:00-08:00"})

Automatic DateTime Conversion: For DATE and DATETIME fields, you can provide values as:

  • ISO 8601 strings (e.g., "2024-12-17T19:00:00Z", "2024-12-17")

  • Unix timestamps in milliseconds (e.g., 1734465600000)

The tool automatically converts ISO 8601 strings to Unix timestamps.

Example answers: [ {"questionId": "q1", "type": "TEXT", "value": "Updated description"}, {"questionId": "q2", "type": "SELECT", "value": "Product A"}, {"questionId": "q3", "type": "NUMBER", "value": 42}, {"questionId": "q4", "type": "DATE", "value": "2024-12-17"} ]

Common answer types:

  • TEXT: String values

  • NUMBER: Numeric values

  • DATE: Date values (ISO 8601 string or Unix timestamp in ms)

  • DATETIME: DateTime values - ⚠️ USE WORKAROUND ABOVE

  • SELECT: Single selection from options

  • MULTI_SELECT: Multiple selections (value as list)

  • CHECKBOX: Boolean values

Args: ctx: The FastMCP context. issue_key: The issue key containing the form. form_id: The form UUID (get from get_issue_proforma_forms). answers: List of answer objects with questionId, type, and value.

Returns: JSON string with operation result.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issue_keyYesJira issue key (e.g., 'PROJ-123')
form_idYesProForma form UUID (e.g., '1946b8b7-8f03-4dc0-ac2d-5fac0d960c6a')
answersYesList of answer objects. Each answer must have: questionId (string), type (TEXT/NUMBER/SELECT/etc), value (any)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. While annotations only indicate destructiveHint=true, the description discloses a critical API limitation (DATETIME fields losing time components), provides a workaround, explains automatic date conversion behavior, and details answer type handling. This goes well beyond the basic safety information in annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (purpose, limitation, workaround, examples, common types, args, returns). While comprehensive, it maintains focus with each section adding value. The front-loaded purpose statement is clear, and the detailed examples are justified given the complexity of the answers parameter. Minor points deducted for some redundancy in the examples section.

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?

Given this is a destructive operation with complex parameter semantics and known API limitations, the description provides excellent completeness. It covers the purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral constraints, parameter details, and includes an output schema. The detailed DATETIME limitation disclosure and workaround are particularly valuable for a tool with destructiveHint=true.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline would be 3, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema. It provides detailed examples of answer objects, explains answer types with specific value formats, and clarifies how DATE/DATETIME values should be provided (ISO 8601 strings or Unix timestamps). This semantic information helps users understand how to structure the answers parameter correctly.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Update form field answers using the Jira Forms REST API.' It specifies the verb ('update'), resource ('form field answers'), and technology context ('Jira Forms REST API'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_update_issue by focusing specifically on form data updates rather than general issue updates.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It states 'This is the primary method for updating form data,' but crucially adds a detailed workaround section for DATETIME fields, explicitly recommending using jira_update_issue instead to preserve time components. This gives clear 'when-not-to-use' guidance for specific scenarios.

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/GeiserX/atlassian-browser-mcp'

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