Skip to main content
Glama
aikts

Yandex Tracker MCP

Update Issue

issue_update

Update an existing Yandex Tracker issue by specifying only the fields you want to change. Unprovided fields remain unchanged.

Instructions

Update an existing Yandex Tracker issue. Only fields that are provided will be updated; omitted fields remain unchanged. Use queue_get_fields to discover available fields before updating.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issue_idYesIssue ID in the format '<project>-<id>', like 'SOMEPROJECT-1'
summaryNoNew issue title/summary
descriptionNoNew issue description (use markdown formatting)
markup_typeNoMarkup type for description text. Use 'md' for YFM (markdown) markup.md
parentNoParent issue reference. Object with 'id' (parent issue ID) and/or 'key' (parent issue key like 'QUEUE-123').
sprintNoSprint assignments. Array of objects, each with 'id' field containing the sprint ID (integer).
typeNoIssue type. Object with 'id' (type ID) and/or 'key' (type key like 'bug', 'task'). Use `queue_get_metadata` tool with expand=['issueTypesConfig'] to get available issue types in this queue.
priorityNoIssue priority. Object with 'id' (priority ID) and/or 'key' (priority key like 'critical', 'normal'). Use get_priorities to find available priorities.
followersNoIssue followers/watchers. Array of objects, each with 'id' field containing the user ID or login.
projectNoProject assignment. Object with 'primary' (int, main project shortId) and optional 'secondary' (list of ints, additional project shortIds).
tagsNoIssue tags as array of strings.
versionNoIssue version for optimistic locking. Changes are only made to the current version of the issue. Always try to receive issue's version using issue_get tool first.
fieldsNoAdditional fields to update. Use queue_get_fields to discover available fields. Use the field's 'id' property as the key (e.g., {'fieldId': 'value'}).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
createdAtNo
updatedAtNo
createdByNo
updatedByNo
versionNo
uniqueNo
keyNo
summaryNo
descriptionNo
typeNo
priorityNo
assigneeNo
statusNo
previousStatusNo
deadlineNo
componentsNo
startNo
storyPointsNo
tagsNo
votesNo
sprintNo
epicNo
parentNo
estimationNo
spentNo
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, and the description confirms this with 'Update' and the partial update behavior ('Only fields that are provided will be updated; omitted fields remain unchanged'). This adds detail beyond annotations, though no destructive behavior or permissions are mentioned. No contradiction with annotations.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first delivers the core purpose, and the second adds critical behavioral insight (partial update) and a useful prerequisite reference. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (13 parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers essential usage context: what the tool does, its partial update nature, and a recommended preliminary step. It does not explain return values or error handling, but the output schema and parameter descriptions compensate. A small improvement would be mentioning that the issue_id is required, but that is obvious from the schema.

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 each parameter already has detailed descriptions. The tool description adds no individual parameter semantics but provides overarching context about partial updates. This meets the baseline expectation but does not exceed it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Update an existing Yandex Tracker issue', specifying a unique verb ('Update') and resource ('existing Yandex Tracker issue'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like issue_create (creates new) and issue_update_comment (updates comments). The partial update wording further clarifies its purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly recommends using queue_get_fields to discover available fields before updating, providing a prerequisite action. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but the partial update behavior and the context of sibling tools make the usage context clear.

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/aikts/yandex-tracker-mcp'

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