Headquarter

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_issue

Create a new issue in a project by specifying title, description, status, and priority. Organize tasks efficiently with structured issue creation.

Instructions

Create a new issue in a project

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "content": "<content>",
      "status": "<status>",
      "priority": "<priority>"
    },
    "name": "create_issue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Issue title
`status`	Yes	Issue status
`content`	Yes	Issue description
`priority`	Yes	Issue priority
`project_id`	Yes	Project ID (slug)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states a write operation but includes no details on success/error responses, authorization, idempotency, or side effects.

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?

A single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose with no unnecessary words. Appropriate for a straightforward creation tool.

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?

The description lacks information about what the tool returns (no output schema) and does not mention error conditions or constraints like required project existence. For a creation tool with no output schema, more context is warranted.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score 3 applies.

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 (create) and resource (issue) and context (in a project). It distinguishes from sibling tools with different verbs or resources, but does not add extra specificity about scope or constraints beyond the name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_issue or delete_issue. There are no prerequisites, context cues, or exclusions mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.