Skip to main content
Glama
goto-software

plane-mcp-server

retrieve_project

Retrieve a project's details using its unique identifier. Access project metadata by supplying the project UUID.

Instructions

Retrieve a project by ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesUUID of the project

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
total_membersNo
total_cyclesNo
total_modulesNo
is_memberNo
sort_orderNo
member_roleNo
is_deployedNo
cover_image_urlNo
created_atNo
updated_atNo
deleted_atNo
nameYes
descriptionNo
description_textNo
description_htmlNo
networkNo
identifierYes
emojiNo
icon_propNo
module_viewNo
cycle_viewNo
issue_views_viewNo
page_viewNo
intake_viewNo
is_time_tracking_enabledNo
is_issue_type_enabledNo
guest_view_all_featuresNo
cover_imageNo
archive_inNo
close_inNo
logo_propsNo
archived_atNo
timezoneNo
external_sourceNo
external_idNo
created_byNo
updated_byNo
workspaceNo
default_assigneeNo
project_leadNo
cover_image_assetNo
estimateNo
default_stateNo
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as permissions, idempotency, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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 extremely concise with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simplicity of a retrieve-by-ID operation and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it could briefly mention what is returned (e.g., full project details).

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for 'project_id' ('UUID of the project'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Retrieve a project by ID' clearly states the verb (retrieve) and resource (project), and specifies the input parameter. It is distinct from sibling 'retrieve_*' tools.

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 on when to use this tool compared to 'list_projects' or other retrieval tools. The description does not mention alternatives or context.

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/goto-software/plane-mcp-server'

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