Skip to main content
Glama

get_task_details

Retrieve detailed information about a specific Linear task by providing its ID to access status, description, and related data from your workspace.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific task

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskIdYesThe ID of the task to retrieve details for

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the 'get_task_details' tool. Validates input, fetches task details from Linear API, enriches with related data, formats as JSON, and returns MCP response.
    private async handleGetTaskDetails(args: any) {
      if (!args?.taskId) {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InvalidParams,
          'taskId is required'
        );
      }
    
      const issue = await linearClient.issue(args.taskId);
      if (!issue) {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InvalidRequest,
          `Task with ID ${args.taskId} not found`
        );
      }
    
      const assignee = issue.assignee ? await issue.assignee : null;
      const team = issue.team ? await issue.team : null;
      const state = issue.state ? await issue.state : null;
      const comments = await issue.comments();
      const attachments = await issue.attachments();
      const labels = await issue.labels();
    
      const formattedIssue = {
        id: issue.id,
        title: issue.title,
        description: issue.description,
        status: state ? state.name : null,
        assignee: assignee ? {
          id: assignee.id,
          name: assignee.name,
          email: assignee.email,
        } : null,
        team: team ? {
          id: team.id,
          name: team.name,
        } : null,
        priority: issue.priority,
        createdAt: issue.createdAt,
        updatedAt: issue.updatedAt,
        dueDate: issue.dueDate,
        estimate: issue.estimate,
        url: issue.url,
        comments: comments.nodes.map(comment => ({
          id: comment.id,
          body: comment.body,
          createdAt: comment.createdAt,
          userId: comment.userId,
        })),
        attachments: attachments.nodes.map(attachment => ({
          id: attachment.id,
          title: attachment.title,
          url: attachment.url,
        })),
        labels: labels.nodes.map(label => ({
          id: label.id,
          name: label.name,
          color: label.color,
        })),
      };
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(formattedIssue, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Input schema for the 'get_task_details' tool defining the required 'taskId' parameter.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        taskId: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'The ID of the task to retrieve details for',
        },
      },
      required: ['taskId'],
    },
  • src/index.ts:78-91 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_task_details' tool in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler, including name, description, and schema.
    {
      name: 'get_task_details',
      description: 'Get detailed information about a specific task',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          taskId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The ID of the task to retrieve details for',
          },
        },
        required: ['taskId'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:116-117 (registration)
    Dispatch/registration in the CallToolRequestSchema switch statement that routes 'get_task_details' calls to the handler.
    case 'get_task_details':
      return await this.handleGetTaskDetails(request.params.arguments);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets' information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what 'detailed information' includes (e.g., fields, format). This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Get detailed information'), making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, achieving ideal conciseness.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter with full schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., safety, errors), doesn't explain return values, and provides minimal usage guidance. For a tool with no structured support, this leaves the agent under-informed.

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%, with the single parameter 'taskId' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying retrieval for a 'specific task', which aligns with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles all parameter documentation.

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 the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific task'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_tasks' (which likely lists multiple tasks) or 'get_teams'/'get_users', leaving some room for sibling confusion.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid task ID), contrast with 'get_tasks' for listing tasks, or specify use cases like retrieving metadata for a single task. This leaves the agent without contextual usage cues.

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/Tyru5/linear-mcp'

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