Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SharkyND

mcp-atlassian

by SharkyND
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

jira_get_issue

Get details of a specific Jira issue including its Epic links and relationship information.

Instructions

Get details of a specific Jira issue including its Epic links and relationship information.

Args: ctx: The FastMCP context. issue_key: Jira issue key. fields: Comma-separated list of fields to return (e.g., 'summary,status,customfield_10010'), a single field as a string (e.g., 'duedate'), '*all' for all fields, or omitted for essentials. expand: Optional fields to expand. comment_limit: Maximum number of comments. properties: Issue properties to return. update_history: Whether to update issue view history.

Returns: JSON string representing the Jira issue object.

Raises: ValueError: If the Jira client is not configured or available.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expandNo(Optional) Fields to expand. Examples: 'renderedFields' (for rendered content), 'transitions' (for available status transitions), 'changelog' (for history)
fieldsNo(Optional) Comma-separated list of fields to return (e.g., 'summary,status,customfield_10010'). You may also provide a single field as a string (e.g., 'duedate'). Use '*all' for all fields (including custom fields), or omit for essential fields only.assignee,description,labels,updated,issuetype,fixVersions,priority,summary,versions,reporter,created,status
issue_keyYesJira issue key (e.g., 'PROJ-123')
propertiesNo(Optional) A comma-separated list of issue properties to return
comment_limitNoMaximum number of comments to include (0 or null for no comments)
update_historyNoWhether to update the issue view history for the requesting user

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / default
      Previous value: -"labels,status,description,assignee,reporter,updated,priority,summary,versions,fixVersions,issuetype,created"New value: +"assignee,description,labels,updated,issuetype,fixVersions,priority,summary,versions,reporter,created,status"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / default
      Previous value: -"status,versions,description,created,priority,reporter,fixVersions,updated,labels,issuetype,assignee,summary"New value: +"labels,status,description,assignee,reporter,updated,priority,summary,versions,fixVersions,issuetype,created"
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / default
      Previous value: -"reporter,issuetype,status,labels,created,summary,assignee,updated,versions,description,priority,fixVersions"New value: +"status,versions,description,created,priority,reporter,fixVersions,updated,labels,issuetype,assignee,summary"
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / default
      Previous value: -"status,assignee,updated,description,versions,reporter,issuetype,summary,created,labels,priority,fixVersions"New value: +"reporter,issuetype,status,labels,created,summary,assignee,updated,versions,description,priority,fixVersions"
  5. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.2-rc.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / default
      Previous value: -"description,updated,reporter,status,summary,assignee,issuetype,priority,created,labels"New value: +"status,assignee,updated,description,versions,reporter,issuetype,summary,created,labels,priority,fixVersions"
  6. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it is not explicitly stated as read-only. It does disclose the return type (JSON string), an error condition (ValueError if the client is not configured), and a subtle side effect via update_history, which updates the issue view history. That is meaningful but leaves the read-only/safety profile and pagination/comment behavior implicit.

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 first sentence is well front-loaded and useful, but the Args/Returns/Raises block mostly duplicates the input schema and adds little beyond it. The description is functional but not tightly edited against the structured data.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail need not be in the description, and the Raises note plus parameter list make it reasonably complete for a single-issue read tool. The main missing piece is any explicit statement of the read-only nature and when to prefer this over sibling read 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters, including examples for expand and field syntax. The Args section largely restates the schema without adding new meaning beyond what is already there, so the baseline of 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get details of a specific Jira issue') and adds scope about Epic links and relationship information, which is more than a tautology. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like jira_search or jira_get_project_issues, but the single-issue focus is clear from the required issue_key.

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 tool versus alternatives such as jira_search (for multiple issues) or jira_get_worklog / jira_get_transitions (for related sub-resources). The context is implied by 'a specific Jira issue' but no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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