Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SharkyND

mcp-atlassian

by SharkyND
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

jira_get_sprint_issues

Get jira issues from sprint.

Instructions

Get jira issues from sprint.

Args: ctx: The FastMCP context. sprint_id: The ID of the sprint. fields: Comma-separated fields to return. start_at: Starting index. limit: Maximum results.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results (1-50)
fieldsNoComma-separated fields to return in the results. Use '*all' for all fields, or specify individual fields like 'summary,status,assignee,priority'assignee,description,labels,updated,issuetype,fixVersions,priority,summary,versions,reporter,created,status
start_atNoStarting index for pagination (0-based)
sprint_idYesThe id of sprint (e.g., '10001')

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. Addedv0.7.0
  5. Removedv0.6.2-rc.1
  6. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the surface purpose. It mentions pagination info in the return value, but that is already captured by the output schema; there is no note on permissions, rate limits, ordering, or auth expectations.

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?

It is structured with Args/Returns sections, which is readable, but 'ctx: The FastMCP context' is noise and the Args block largely duplicates the schema. Front-loaded purpose is fine but the content is padded without adding value.

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?

With an output schema present, return values needn't be explained, and all four params are schema-documented, so the definition is minimally viable. However, given the many overlapping issue-retrieval siblings, it lacks the differentiation an agent needs to select it confidently.

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 every parameter (fields syntax, limit range, 0-based start_at, sprint_id format). The description merely restates the parameter names and adds no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 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 clear verb+resource: retrieve Jira issues belonging to a given sprint. It is specific about scope (sprint) but does not distinguish itself from close siblings like jira_get_board_issues, jira_get_project_issues, or jira_search, all of which return issue collections.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus jira_get_board_issues, jira_search, or jira_get_project_issues, nor any prerequisite (e.g., needing a sprint ID from jira_get_sprints_from_board). The agent must infer usage entirely.

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