Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
huly-mcp-selfhost

huly-mcp-selfhost

by JoKeks2023
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

create_component

Create a project component (sub-area) to group issues under a shared component label, enabling organized issue tracking by component.

Instructions

Create a component (sub-area) in a project; issues get it via componentLabel. Change it: update_component

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "projectIdentifier": "<projectIdentifier>",
      "label": "<label>"
    },
    "name": "create_component"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
leadNoPerson name
labelYesComponent name
workspaceYes
descriptionNo
projectIdentifierYesProject key

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.6.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / label / description
      Added value: +"Component name"
  2. First observedv3.5.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=false and a title, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the side effect that issues reference components through componentLabel, but says nothing about duplicate-name behavior, permissions, or whether the new component is immediately available for issue assignment.

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?

One compact sentence plus a routing clause, front-loaded with the action and the domain clarification. Every fragment earns its place and nothing is padded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Five parameters, three of them required, no output schema, and near-empty annotations — the definition should say a bit more about what comes back (e.g., the component label/id needed to apply it to issues) and about which fields are mandatory. The core create semantics are covered, but the edges are thin for a mutation tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 60%, so the schema already explains label, lead, and projectIdentifier. The description adds the conceptual link between the component and componentLabel but leaves the undescribed 'workspace' and 'description' parameters untouched, so it only partially compensates for the gap.

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 and resource ('Create a component') and immediately disambiguates the domain term by glossing it as '(sub-area) in a project', plus explains the downstream effect ('issues get it via componentLabel'). That is enough for an agent to tell this apart from siblings like create_label or update_component without opening a schema.

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?

The clause 'Change it: update_component' explicitly routes modification requests to the sibling, which is exactly the ambiguity an agent would otherwise have. It gives no prerequisites, though — nothing about needing an existing project or required permissions.

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