HacknPlan MCP Server

update_work_items

Batch update work items with support for auto-creating tags and consolidating assignments, milestones, and stage changes in a single call.

Instructions

Update one or more work items (array-based). Supports auto-create for tags: when string names are provided and the tag does not exist, it will be created automatically. Consolidates all setter operations (assignedUserIds, tagIds, parentStoryId, designElementId) into a single call. Returns unified response with items array, counts, per-item errors, and warnings for auto-created tags.

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": {
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "update_work_items"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes	Array of work items to update (1-100 items)
`projectId`	No	The project ID (optional if HACKNPLAN_DEFAULT_PROJECT set)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv7.2.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses auto-create for tags, unified response structure, and per-item errors/warnings. However, it does not mention permission requirements, idempotency, or whether partial failures are possible. Missing details on destructive potential or rate limits.

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?

The description is concise at three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and each sentence adds distinct information (purpose, auto-create, consolidation, response). No redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (batch update, nested objects, auto-create), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers key aspects: auto-create, per-item errors, and response structure. It does not cover transactional behavior or authorization, but is reasonably complete for agent use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context for tagIds (auto-create) and the items array (batch size 1-100), but does not substantially enhance understanding beyond the schema descriptions for other parameters.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'one or more work items', specifying it is array-based. It distinguishes from siblings like delete or create tools by highlighting batch update and consolidation of setter operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for batch updates and consolidating setters but does not explicitly say when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., create_work_items for new items, or single-item update tools if they existed). No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server