Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Redmine MCP Server

Redmine MCP Server

by GonzaloRando03
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_issue_relations

Fetch all relations (parent, child, blocked, etc.) for a specific issue by providing its numeric ID.

Instructions

Lists all relations of an issue.

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_id": "<issue_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_issue_relations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issue_idYesNumeric issue ID (required)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is minimal, failing to disclose behavioral traits like return format, pagination, error conditions, or side effects. The agent lacks critical information for safe invocation.

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 a single concise sentence with no fluff. While very brief, it fits the simple tool structure, though could be slightly more informative.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what relations are, the format of the output, or any constraints, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

The input schema covers the single parameter well at 100%, with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 lists all relations of an issue, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_issue_relation, delete_issue_relation, and get_issue_relation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_issue_relation for a single relation. No context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools