Skip to main content
Glama

redmine_create_issue

Create a Redmine issue with key fields: project, tracker, priority, assignee, dates, attachments, and structured description.

Instructions

Create a new Redmine issue. The description should be well-structured: brief statement of what needs to be done, context/why, scope, and links. For bugs: include steps to reproduce, environment, and screenshots.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subjectYesIssue title -- concise but descriptive
due_dateNoDue date (YYYY-MM-DD)
status_idNoStatus ID (1=New, 2=Assigned, 3=Solved, 5=Closed, 17=Review, 19=30_InProgress, etc.)
done_ratioNoDone percentage (0-100)
project_idYesProject identifier (e.g. 'panama') or numeric ID
start_dateNoStart date (YYYY-MM-DD)
tracker_idNoTracker ID (1=Bug, 2=Feature, 3=Support, etc.)
attachmentsNoAbsolute file paths to attach (images, PDFs, etc.)
category_idNoIssue category ID (project-specific)
descriptionYesIssue description. Structure as: brief statement, Context, Scope, Links. For bugs: Steps to reproduce, Environment, Screenshots.
priority_idNoPriority ID (1=Low, 2=Normal, 3=High, 4=Urgent, 5=Immediate)
custom_fieldsNoCustom field values, e.g. [{"id": 5, "value": "3. Major"}]
assigned_to_idNoUser ID to assign the issue to
estimated_hoursNoEstimated hours for the task
parent_issue_idNoParent issue ID (for sub-tasks)
fixed_version_idNoTarget version / milestone ID (project-specific)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, return values, or side effects of creating an issue. The only additional guidance is about structuring the description content, which duplicates the schema's description parameter and does not reveal tool behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. The second sentence provides practical formatting advice, but it repeats the schema, so slightly redundant.

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?

For a tool with 16 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not mention what the tool returns after creation, any prerequisites, or error handling, leaving the agent uninformed about post-creation behavior.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description merely restates the formatting guidance for the description parameter already present in the schema, adding no new semantics for other parameters.

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 'Create a new Redmine issue,' identifying the action (create) and resource (Redmine issue). The word 'new' distinguishes it from update operations like redmine_update_issue, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 conveys that this tool is for creating new issues, but it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear enough for a straightforward create operation, though exclusions are not mentioned.

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/beborico1/mcp-redmine'

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