Plane MCP

get_work_item

Retrieve a single work item by its UUID to inspect its details, including state, assignees, and labels.

Instructions

Get a single work item by its UUID.

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": "get_work_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`expand`	No	state,assignees,labels
`issue_id`	Yes
`project_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It merely restates the operation (getting) without disclosing any behavioral traits such as read-only status, error handling, auth requirements, or whether the expand parameter affects response size. The description adds no context beyond the name itself.

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 a single, focused sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without fluff. It earns its place by being direct and readable.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description omits important context: the purpose of expand, the optional project_id, and how this tool differs from get_work_item_by_number. For a tool with 3 parameters and 0% schema coverage, this is incomplete guidance.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It only clarifies that issue_id is a UUID, but does not explain expand (defaulting to 'state,assignees,labels') or project_id. The description adds minimal value for 3 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource, 'a single work item', and the method 'by its UUID'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_work_items and get_work_item_by_number, which retrieve by different criteria.

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 phrase 'by its UUID' provides clear context: use this tool when you have a work item's UUID. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using get_work_item_by_number when you have a numeric identifier.

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