Skip to main content
Glama
aikts

Yandex Tracker MCP

issue_get_checklist

Retrieve checklist items for a specific issue in Yandex Tracker using its unique issue ID. Simplify issue management by accessing detailed task checklists directly.

Instructions

Get checklist items of a Yandex Tracker issue by its id

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issue_idYesIssue ID in the format '<project>-<id>', like 'SOMEPROJECT-1'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The primary MCP tool handler for 'issue_get_checklist'. It performs authorization check via check_issue_id and delegates to the issues protocol implementation.
    @mcp.tool(description="Get checklist items of a Yandex Tracker issue by its id")
    async def issue_get_checklist(
        ctx: Context[Any, AppContext],
        issue_id: IssueID,
    ) -> list[ChecklistItem]:
        check_issue_id(settings, issue_id)
    
        return await ctx.request_context.lifespan_context.issues.issue_get_checklist(
            issue_id,
            auth=get_yandex_auth(ctx),
        )
  • Explicit registration of all MCP tools, including 'issue_get_checklist', by invoking register_tools on the FastMCP server instance.
    register_tools(settings, mcp)
  • Pydantic-based input schema definition for the 'issue_id' parameter using Annotated type with description and validation.
    IssueID = Annotated[
        str,
        Field(description="Issue ID in the format '<project>-<id>', like 'SOMEPROJECT-1'"),
    ]
  • Core implementation in TrackerClient that performs the HTTP GET request to Yandex Tracker API endpoint '/v3/issues/{issue_id}/checklistItems' and parses the JSON response into ChecklistItem list.
    async def issue_get_checklist(
        self, issue_id: str, *, auth: YandexAuth | None = None
    ) -> list[ChecklistItem]:
        async with self._session.get(
            f"v3/issues/{issue_id}/checklistItems",
            headers=await self._build_headers(auth),
        ) as response:
            if response.status == 404:
                raise IssueNotFound(issue_id)
            response.raise_for_status()
            return ChecklistItemList.model_validate_json(await response.read()).root
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 the tool retrieves data ('Get'), implying a read operation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'checklist items' entail (e.g., format, completeness). This leaves significant gaps for a tool interacting with an external system.

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 that front-loads the core purpose without any redundant words. Every element ('Get checklist items', 'Yandex Tracker issue', 'by its id') contributes essential information, making it optimally concise.

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's moderate complexity (external API interaction), the description is minimally adequate. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but with no annotations and incomplete behavioral context, the description doesn't fully prepare an agent for reliable invocation, especially regarding error handling or system-specific constraints.

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 'issue_id' fully documented in the schema (including format example). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond mentioning 'by its id', which is already implied. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get checklist items') and target resource ('of a Yandex Tracker issue by its id'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from similar sibling tools like issue_get, issue_get_attachments, or issue_get_comments, which all retrieve specific issue components.

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 an existing issue), exclusions, or compare it to sibling tools that retrieve other issue components like attachments or comments, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

Related 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/aikts/yandex-tracker-mcp'

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