Find Jira issues by running custom JQL queries. Retrieve specific tickets based on project, status, or other criteria to inspect and manage work items.
Search Jira issues using a custom JQL (Jira Query Language) string.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| jql | Yes | JQL query string, e.g. 'project = ABC AND status = "In Progress"'. | |
| max_results | No | Maximum number of issues to return (default 25). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read ("Search") but says nothing about pagination beyond the default, result ordering, error behavior on malformed JQL, or any rate/permission constraints.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. Efficient, though it spends its brevity budget on restating the schema rather than on guidance.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
A simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, so the description is minimally adequate. The absence of annotations leaves a gap around read-safety and result behavior that a sentence or two could have closed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both jql and max_results are already documented with examples and a default. The description only restates that jql is a JQL string, adding no syntax or format value beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (Search) and resource (Jira issues) plus the mechanism (custom JQL string). This distinguishes it from get_jira_ticket (single issue) and get_my_jira_tickets (pre-scoped to the current user), though it never explicitly names those siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as get_my_jira_tickets for a personal-ticket query. The agent must infer that a custom JQL string is the differentiator.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.