Skip to main content
Glama
hackdonalds

JIRA MCP Server

by hackdonalds

Search JIRA Issues

jira_search

Search JIRA issues using JQL queries to find specific tickets, track progress, and manage project workflows efficiently.

Instructions

Search issues using JQL (JIRA Query Language)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jqlYesJQL query string
startAtNoStarting index for pagination (default: 0)
maxResultsNoMaximum number of results (default: 50)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for jira_search tool that invokes JiraClient.searchIssues and formats the response as text content.
    async ({ jql, startAt = 0, maxResults = 50 }) => {
      logger.info('Searching JIRA issues', { jql, startAt, maxResults });
      try {
        const searchResults = await jiraClient.searchIssues(jql, startAt, maxResults);
        logger.info('Successfully searched issues', { 
          jql, 
          resultCount: searchResults.issues?.length || 0 
        });
        return {
          content: [{
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(searchResults, null, 2)
          }]
        };
      } catch (error) {
        logger.error('Failed to search issues', { jql, error: error.message });
        throw error;
      }
    }
  • Input schema for jira_search tool defining parameters jql, startAt, and maxResults using Zod.
    {
      title: 'Search JIRA Issues',
      description: 'Search issues using JQL (JIRA Query Language)',
      inputSchema: {
        jql: z.string().describe('JQL query string'),
        startAt: z.number().optional().describe('Starting index for pagination (default: 0)'),
        maxResults: z.number().optional().describe('Maximum number of results (default: 50)')
      }
  • server.js:218-249 (registration)
    Registration of the jira_search tool with McpServer using registerTool method.
    // Register jira_search tool
    server.registerTool(
      'jira_search',
      {
        title: 'Search JIRA Issues',
        description: 'Search issues using JQL (JIRA Query Language)',
        inputSchema: {
          jql: z.string().describe('JQL query string'),
          startAt: z.number().optional().describe('Starting index for pagination (default: 0)'),
          maxResults: z.number().optional().describe('Maximum number of results (default: 50)')
        }
      },
      async ({ jql, startAt = 0, maxResults = 50 }) => {
        logger.info('Searching JIRA issues', { jql, startAt, maxResults });
        try {
          const searchResults = await jiraClient.searchIssues(jql, startAt, maxResults);
          logger.info('Successfully searched issues', { 
            jql, 
            resultCount: searchResults.issues?.length || 0 
          });
          return {
            content: [{
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify(searchResults, null, 2)
            }]
          };
        } catch (error) {
          logger.error('Failed to search issues', { jql, error: error.message });
          throw error;
        }
      }
    );
  • JiraClient.searchIssues method that performs the actual JIRA API search request.
    async searchIssues(jql, startAt = 0, maxResults = 50) {
      logger.info('Searching JIRA issues', { jql, startAt, maxResults });
      return await this.makeRequest('search', {
        method: 'POST',
        body: JSON.stringify({ jql, startAt, maxResults })
      });
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action ('Search issues') but lacks behavioral details: it doesn't disclose that this is a read-only operation (implied but not explicit), doesn't mention authentication needs, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond schema hints, or what the output looks like. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Search issues') and method ('using JQL'), making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, and there's no redundant information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (search with pagination), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format, error handling, or behavioral traits like read-only nature. For a tool with 3 parameters and no structured safety hints, more context is needed to guide an AI agent effectively.

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 fully documents all parameters (jql, startAt, maxResults). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema—it mentions 'using JQL' but doesn't explain JQL syntax or usage. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't detract either.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Search') and resource ('JIRA Issues') with the specific method ('using JQL'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'jira_get_issue' (single issue retrieval) and 'jira_create_issue' (creation), but doesn't explicitly contrast with other search-related tools since none are listed. The purpose is specific but could be more distinctive.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a JQL query), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'jira_get_issue' for single issues. The description assumes the user knows when search is appropriate, offering no explicit usage 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/hackdonalds/jira-mcp'

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