linear_get_issueRetrieve a single Linear issue by UUID or identifier, returning state, assignee, parent, children, labels, and relations.
Return one issue by UUID or identifier (e.g. ENG-4651), including state, assignee, parent, children, labels and relations.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Issue UUID or identifier |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by listing the included related data: state, assignee, parent, children, labels, and relations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, well-structured sentence that leads with the core purpose and then enumerates what is included. No filler or redundant content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple single-issue lookup with one parameter, the description fully covers what the tool does and what data it returns. The readOnlyHint covers safety, and the included fields are enumerated sufficiently given the absence of an output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already documents the id parameter with full coverage. The description reinforces this with a concrete identifier example, adding practical format context beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool returns one issue by UUID or identifier, with a concrete example (ENG-4651). It specifies the resource and scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like linear_search_issues or linear_list_issues.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for fetching a single issue when you already have its UUID or identifier. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.