Skip to main content
Glama

Get My Work Summary

get_my_work_summary

Retrieve a summary of your Jira work activity by specifying a date range to view issues you updated, commented on, or transitioned.

Instructions

Get a summary of issues the CURRENT_USER has worked on (updated, commented, or transitioned) within a date range

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
startDateYesStart date in YYYY-MM-DD format
endDateYesEnd date in YYYY-MM-DD format

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
issuesNo

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:171-219 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_my_work_summary' MCP tool using server.registerTool(). Includes title, description, inputSchema (startDate/endDate), outputSchema (issues or error), and the handler function.
    server.registerTool(
      'get_my_work_summary',
      {
        title: 'Get My Work Summary',
        description: 'Get a summary of issues the CURRENT_USER has worked on (updated, commented, or transitioned) within a date range',
        inputSchema: {
          startDate: z.string().describe('Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format'),
          endDate: z.string().describe('End date in YYYY-MM-DD format'),
        },
        outputSchema: {
          issues: z.array(z.object({
            key: z.string(),
            summary: z.string(),
            status: z.string(),
            lastActivityType: z.string(),
          })).optional(),
          error: z.object({
            message: z.string(),
            statusCode: z.number().optional(),
            details: z.unknown().optional(),
          }).optional(),
        },
      },
      async ({ startDate, endDate }) => {
        try {
          // Validate date format
          const dateRegex = /^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$/;
          if (!dateRegex.test(startDate)) {
            throw new Error('startDate must be in YYYY-MM-DD format');
          }
          if (!dateRegex.test(endDate)) {
            throw new Error('endDate must be in YYYY-MM-DD format');
          }
    
          const issues = await getWorkSummary(CURRENT_USER, startDate, endDate);
          const output = { issues };
          return {
            content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(output, null, 2) }],
            structuredContent: output,
          };
        } catch (error) {
          const output = formatError(error);
          return {
            content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(output, null, 2) }],
            structuredContent: output,
            isError: true,
          };
        }
      }
  • Input and output schemas using Zod for validating tool parameters and response structure.
    {
      title: 'Get My Work Summary',
      description: 'Get a summary of issues the CURRENT_USER has worked on (updated, commented, or transitioned) within a date range',
      inputSchema: {
        startDate: z.string().describe('Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format'),
        endDate: z.string().describe('End date in YYYY-MM-DD format'),
      },
      outputSchema: {
        issues: z.array(z.object({
          key: z.string(),
          summary: z.string(),
          status: z.string(),
          lastActivityType: z.string(),
        })).optional(),
        error: z.object({
          message: z.string(),
          statusCode: z.number().optional(),
          details: z.unknown().optional(),
        }).optional(),
      },
    },
  • Inline MCP tool handler: validates date formats, calls getWorkSummary helper, formats output or error response.
    async ({ startDate, endDate }) => {
      try {
        // Validate date format
        const dateRegex = /^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$/;
        if (!dateRegex.test(startDate)) {
          throw new Error('startDate must be in YYYY-MM-DD format');
        }
        if (!dateRegex.test(endDate)) {
          throw new Error('endDate must be in YYYY-MM-DD format');
        }
    
        const issues = await getWorkSummary(CURRENT_USER, startDate, endDate);
        const output = { issues };
        return {
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(output, null, 2) }],
          structuredContent: output,
        };
      } catch (error) {
        const output = formatError(error);
        return {
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(output, null, 2) }],
          structuredContent: output,
          isError: true,
        };
      }
  • Core logic helper: constructs JQL for user's issues (assignee/reporter/commenter) updated in date range, searches issues, and maps to output format.
    export async function getWorkSummary(
      username: string,
      startDate: string,
      endDate: string
    ): Promise<WorkSummaryItem[]> {
      // JQL to find issues where the user was involved (assignee, reporter, commenter, or updated)
      const jql = `(assignee = "${username}" OR reporter = "${username}" OR "comment author" = "${username}") AND updated >= "${startDate}" AND updated <= "${endDate}" ORDER BY updated DESC`;
    
      const issues = await searchIssues(jql, ['summary', 'status', 'priority', 'updated']);
    
      return issues.map((issue) => ({
        key: issue.key,
        summary: issue.summary,
        status: issue.status,
        lastActivityType: 'updated', // Simplified - could be enhanced with changelog API
      }));
    }
Behavior3/5

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 clearly indicates this is a read operation ('Get') and specifies the scope (current user, date range, specific activities). However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits, authentication requirements, or what 'summary' entails (e.g., aggregated counts vs detailed list). The description adds useful context but lacks comprehensive behavioral details.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose, scope, and parameters. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (date-range filtered summary), no annotations, but with a complete input schema and an output schema (implied by 'Has output schema: true'), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the core functionality and scope adequately, though additional behavioral context would enhance completeness for a tool with no annotation support.

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 schema already fully documents both parameters (startDate and endDate) with format details. The description adds value by explaining the semantic purpose of these parameters ('within a date range'), but doesn't provide additional syntax or constraints beyond what the schema offers. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Get a summary') and resource ('issues the CURRENT_USER has worked on'), with precise scope details ('updated, commented, or transitioned within a date range'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'get_my_issues' by focusing on summary rather than listing, and from 'get_team_activity' by being user-specific.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: when needing a summary of the current user's work activities within a date range. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear for an agent to understand its purpose relative to siblings like 'get_my_issues' or 'search_issues'.

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/eh24905-wiz/jira-mcp'

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