Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
dpesch

MantisBT MCP Server

by dpesch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get Issue

get_issue
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve one MantisBT issue by ID or up to 50 issues by IDs, optionally selecting specific fields to reduce response size.

Instructions

Retrieve one MantisBT issue by "id", or several by "ids" (1–50). Pass exactly one of the two.

With "id": returns the issue with all fields including notes (each with view_url), attachments and relationships, unless "select" is given. With "ids": returns { issues, requested, found, failed } — requests run in parallel (max 5 concurrent); missing or inaccessible IDs give null at their position instead of failing the call.

Use "select" to fetch only some fields, e.g. select: "notes" for just the notes or select: "attachments" for just the file attachments of an issue.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoNumeric issue ID (use either id or ids)
idsNoSeveral issue IDs (1–50) to fetch in one call (use either id or ids)
selectNoComma-separated list of fields to include in the response (server-side projection, same as list_issues). Significantly reduces response size. Example: "id,summary,status,notes"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.15.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Numeric issue ID"New value: +"Numeric issue ID (use either id or ids)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / ids
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Several issue IDs (1–50) to fetch in one call (use either id or ids)",
+  "items": {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 50,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "id"
-]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.14.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.10.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / select
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma-separated list of fields to include in the response (server-side projection, same as list_issues). Significantly reduces response size. Example: \"id,summary,status,notes\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. Addedv1.10.4
  5. Removed
  6. First observedv1.5.6

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive semantics, yet the description still adds substantial value: the batch response envelope { issues, requested, found, failed }, max 5 concurrency, and the key non-obvious behavior that missing/inaccessible IDs yield null in place rather than failing the whole call.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then one paragraph per argument mode, then the projection tip. No filler sentences; the batch failure semantics are stated compactly in a single clause.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so return-shape disclosure falls to the description, and it delivers both variants including view_url on notes and the null-on-failure rule. Nothing needed to call this correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the 3 baseline already holds for the id/ids descriptions and the 1–50 bound. The description goes beyond it by stating the exclusive-or constraint operationally and by showing concrete select usage (select: "notes", select: "attachments") that clarifies the projection's granularity.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (retrieve a MantisBT issue) and explicitly covers both the single-ID and batch modes. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identically named sibling get_issues or from list_issues, which an agent must disambiguate on its own.

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?

"Pass exactly one of the two" gives a clear, explicit calling rule, and the select paragraph explains when to use projection. It stops short of naming an alternative tool or stating when to prefer get_issues/list_issues over this one.

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