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

huly-mcp-selfhost

by JoKeks2023
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

link_document

Attach a document to an issue’s Relations panel so related specs and context stay accessible from the issue view.

Instructions

Link a document to an issue (Relations panel)

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>",
      "identifier": "<identifier>",
      "documentId": "<documentId>"
    },
    "name": "link_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workspaceYes
documentIdYesDocument id
identifierYesIssue id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.5.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations supply only destructiveHint=false, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden. It reveals that the link surfaces in the Relations panel, but says nothing about idempotency on duplicate links, permissions required, or whether the relation is visible from the document side.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, but it is under-specified rather than efficient; the parenthetical is the only content beyond the verb phrase.

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?

For a three-required-parameter mutation with no output schema and thin annotations, the description should cover the identifier format and post-link behavior. Neither is present, so an agent can identify the purpose but not call it confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67%, with documentId and identifier documented only as "Document id" and "Issue id", and workspace undocumented. The description adds nothing, and notably does not resolve whether identifier is an internal UUID or a human-readable issue key such as ABC-123.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Link a document to an issue" names a specific verb and both resources, and the "(Relations panel)" note anchors the effect to a visible UI location. It does not differentiate this from siblings such as add_relation or attach_file, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus add_relation or attach_file, and no prerequisites such as whether the document must already belong to the workspace. The agent must infer the use case entirely from the tool name.

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