Skip to main content
Glama

Get Issue Enum Values

get_issue_enums
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve valid IDs, names, and localized labels for all issue enum fields to use when creating or updating MantisBT issues.

Instructions

Return valid ID, name, and (if available) localized label for all issue enum fields.

Use this tool before creating or updating issues to look up the correct value for severity, status, priority, resolution, or reproducibility.

Example response (English installation): { "severity": [{"id": 10, "name": "feature"}, {"id": 50, "name": "minor"}, ...], "status": [{"id": 10, "name": "new"}, {"id": 20, "name": "feedback"}, ...], "priority": [{"id": 10, "name": "none"}, {"id": 30, "name": "normal"}, ...], "resolution": [{"id": 10, "name": "open"}, {"id": 20, "name": "fixed"}, ...], "reproducibility": [{"id": 10, "name": "always"}, {"id": 70, "name": "have not tried"}, ...] }

Example response (localized installation, e.g. German): { "status": [ {"id": 10, "name": "new", "label": "Neu"}, {"id": 20, "name": "feedback", "label": "Feedback"}, {"id": 30, "name": "acknowledged", "label": "Bestätigt"}, ... ], ... }

Fields:

  • "id" — numeric ID accepted by the API

  • "name" — localized or canonical name from the MantisBT database

  • "label" — UI display label (only present when it differs from "name")

  • "canonical_name" — English canonical name (only present on localized installs)

For create_issue (severity, priority, reproducibility): pass the canonical English name, the localized "name", or the "label" — all are accepted. The server resolves them to the correct ID.

For update_issue: pass either "id" or "name" in the field reference object.

Note: on some installations enum values are customized at the database level. In that case "name" itself may be localized (e.g. "kleinerer Fehler" instead of "minor") and no "label" will be present because there is no separate English original.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable details: response structure, presence of localized 'label' field, and notes about database-level customization. It also provides concrete examples that illustrate behavior across different installations, complementing annotations effectively.

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 well-structured with clear sections (summary, usage, examples, field descriptions, notes). It is front-loaded with the core purpose. While somewhat lengthy, every section adds necessary value and the organization aids readability.

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?

Given the complexity of enum fields with localization and customization, and the absence of an output schema, the description provides complete context. It covers example responses, field semantics, installation-specific behavior, and usage differences between create and update operations.

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?

The tool has no parameters (0 params, schema coverage 100%). With no parameters, the description's role is to explain the output, which it does thoroughly with examples and field descriptions. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets this by adding context beyond the schema.

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 the tool returns valid ID, name, and localized label for all issue enum fields. It specifies the fields covered (severity, status, priority, resolution, reproducibility) and differentiates from sibling tools like get_issue_fields and create_issue, making its 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 explicitly advises to use this tool before creating or updating issues to look up correct enum values. It provides separate guidance for create_issue and update_issue, explaining accepted input formats. Though it doesn't explicitly list when not to use, the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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/dpesch/mantisbt-mcp-server'

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