Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ARCLinearGitHub-MCP

ARCLinearGitHub-MCP

by arclabs-studio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

linear_list_states

List available workflow states for a Linear project. Retrieve state names and IDs to use in automated workflows or status tracking.

Instructions

List available workflow states for a project.

Args: project: Project/team key. Defaults to configured default_project.

Returns: Dictionary with list of states

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "linear_list_states"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions a default parameter but lacks details on authentication, side effects, or return format beyond 'Dictionary with list of states'.

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 very concise, with one sentence for the purpose and a clear args section. No extraneous text.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter, the description is mostly complete. It explains the parameter and return type, but could provide more context about what 'states' are or how they relate to projects.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The parameter 'project' has no schema description, but the description adds meaning by explaining it is a project/team key and defaults to a configured default_project, adding value.

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 it lists available workflow states for a project, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like linear_list_issues or linear_list_labels.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as linear_list_issues or linear_get_issue. The description does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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