Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
brianstone

Jira MCP Server

by brianstone
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Jira MCP 服务器

⚠️ 此 MCP 服务器正在开发中 ⚠️

与 Jira 通信的 MCP 服务器。

这可能适用于 Jira Data Center 休息端点（ /rest/api/2 ），但截至目前，仅测试了云端点（ /rest/api/3 ）。

运行服务器

  1. 克隆此 repo

  2. cd进入 repo

  3. 运行npm install

  4. 运行npm run build

在您的 MCP 客户端中，您需要添加以下环境变量：

  • JIRA_PROJECT_URL - 在末尾包含/rest/api/3 。类似如下： https://your-project.atlassian.net/rest/api/3 。

  • JIRA_USER_EMAIL - 您的用户电子邮件地址。这是 API 授权所必需的。

  • JIRA_API_KEY - 您的 Jira API 密钥。您可以在此处找到有关创建和管理 Jira API 密钥的信息。

  • JIRA_PROJECT_KEY - 您想要用于创建新问题的默认密钥

Related MCP server: Jira Cloud MCP Server

可用工具

  • 通过密钥获取问题

  • 搜索问题

  • 创建问题

  • 分配问题

  • 取消分配问题

  • 编辑问题

  • 过渡问题

  • 存档问题

资源

设置，但未实现。

使用 MCP 客户端（Claude Desktop、Cursor 等）进行设置

将服务器添加到 MCP 客户端的配置文件中。

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "jira-mcp-server": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["path-to-repo/jira-mcp-server/build/index.js"],
      "env": {
        "JIRA_PROJECT_URL": "https://project-url.atlassian.net/rest/api/3",
        "JIRA_USER_EMAIL": "your_email@example.com",
        "JIRA_API_KEY": "yourAPIkey",
        "JIRA_PROJECT_KEY": "ABC"
      }
    }
  }
}

问题

如果您遇到任何问题，请打开。

Available Tools

1 tool
example_toolC

An example tool that processes messages

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNoMessage to process

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided and the description lacks any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or read-only/mutating nature.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While short, the description is under-specified and does not earn its place with substantive information.

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?

Given the simple schema and no output schema or annotations, the description fails to provide complete context, e.g., what the output is or expected 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no value beyond the schema definition for the only parameter 'message'.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'processes messages' is vague and does not specify what kind of processing or distinguish from sibling tools like api-client, data-processor, and file-handler.

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; no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedexample_tool
Deploy Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The single tool 'example_tool' has a distinct purpose by default, as there are no other tools to compare it to.

Naming Consistency5/5

The naming is trivially consistent because there is only one tool. The tool name 'example_tool' follows a snake_case pattern, and with no other tools, there is no inconsistency to evaluate.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a Jira MCP server, which typically involves managing issues, projects, workflows, and other entities. This minimal set suggests an incomplete or placeholder implementation, failing to cover the expected domain scope.

Completeness1/5

The tool set is severely incomplete for a Jira server. With only an 'example_tool' that processes messages, there are no tools for core Jira operations like creating, retrieving, updating, or deleting issues, projects, or other resources, leaving significant gaps that will cause agent failures.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • Jira MCP Server

    AlexVulaj
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    An MCP server for integrating with Jira Server instances, enabling natural language interactions to create, update, search, and manage issues and comments.
    65
    1
    MIT

  • Jira Cloud MCP Server

    aaronsb
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    MCP server for interacting with Jira Cloud instances. Enables issue management, JQL queries, project and sprint management, and batch operations via natural language interfaces.
    195
    4
    MIT

Appeared in Searches