Skip to main content
Glama

jira_get_board_issues

Retrieve Jira issues from a board filtered by JQL query, with pagination and custom field selection.

Instructions

Get all issues linked to a specific board filtered by JQL.

Args: ctx: The FastMCP context. board_id: The ID of the board. jql: JQL query string to filter issues. fields: Comma-separated fields to return. start_at: Starting index for pagination. limit: Maximum number of results. expand: Optional fields to expand.

Returns: JSON string representing the search results including pagination info.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jqlYesJQL query string (Jira Query Language). Examples: - Find Epics: "issuetype = Epic AND project = PROJ" - Find issues in Epic: "parent = PROJ-123" - Find by status: "status = 'In Progress' AND project = PROJ" - Find by assignee: "assignee = currentUser()" - Find recently updated: "updated >= -7d AND project = PROJ" - Find by label: "labels = frontend AND project = PROJ" - Find by priority: "priority = High AND project = PROJ"
limitNoMaximum number of results (1-50)
expandNoOptional fields to expand in the response (e.g., 'changelog').version
fieldsNoComma-separated fields to return in the results. Use '*all' for all fields, or specify individual fields like 'summary,status,assignee,priority'description,updated,reporter,status,summary,assignee,issuetype,priority,created,labels
board_idYesThe id of the board (e.g., '1001')
start_atNoStarting index for pagination (0-based)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states it returns a JSON string with search results and pagination info, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, or limitations like rate limits. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 description includes an Args list that is redundant with the input schema. It could be more concise by focusing on the core purpose and usage. The structure is clear but wordy.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is adequate. However, it lacks context about how to obtain the board_id (via jira_get_agile_boards) and when to prefer this over other issue-listing tools.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description lists parameters in Args but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states 'Get all issues linked to a specific board filtered by JQL', which identifies the verb (get), resource (issues linked to a board), and filter (JQL). It distinguishes from siblings like jira_get_sprint_issues or jira_get_project_issues, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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. It does not mention that it is specific to board issues or that other tools exist for different scopes (project, sprint, general search).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SharkyND/mcp-atlassian'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server