Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Redmine MCP Server

Redmine MCP Server

by compasify
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

getIssueCategory

Retrieve an issue category by ID to view its details. This helps manage and organize issues within Redmine projects.

Instructions

Show issue category

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": {
      "pathParams": "<pathParams>"
    },
    "name": "getIssueCategory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathParamsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.4

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, what the response format is, or behavior on missing IDs. The word 'show' is vague and lacks any detail about side effects or error handling.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very concise at only four words, but that brevity comes at the cost of necessary detail. It is not verbose, but it also isn't efficiently informative, making it under-specified rather than well-structured.

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 a simple tool with no output schema and no annotation, the description should at least note that it retrieves a single issue category by ID and returns its details, plus perhaps the expected response format. It does none of this, leaving the agent without critical context for successful invocation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description mentions none of the parameters (format, issueCategoryId). It does not explain the meaning of the ID, the format enum, or how they interact. The description adds no value beyond the tool name.

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 uses 'Show issue category' which is a clear verb+resource pair, indicating the tool retrieves an issue category. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like getIssueCategories (which lists all) or updateIssueCategory, so it is clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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 vs alternatives such as getIssueCategories for listing all categories or updateIssueCategory/deleteIssueCategory. The description simply states what it does without context, so an agent receives no help in choosing between related tools.

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