Skip to main content
Glama

Create Issue

jira_create_issue

Create a Jira issue in a specified project with summary, description, issue type, and optional assignee, components, or additional fields. Link to an epic or set parent for subtasks.

Instructions

Create a new Jira issue with optional Epic link or parent for subtasks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
summaryYesSummary/title of the issue
assigneeNo(Optional) Assignee's user identifier (string): Email, display name, or account ID (e.g., 'user@example.com', 'John Doe', 'accountid:...')
componentsNo(Optional) Comma-separated list of component names to assign (e.g., 'Frontend,API')
issue_typeYesIssue type (e.g. 'Task', 'Bug', 'Story', 'Epic', 'Subtask'). The available types depend on your project configuration. For subtasks, use 'Subtask' (not 'Sub-task') and include parent in additional_fields.
descriptionNoIssue description in Markdown format. On Jira Cloud, use '{expand:Title}...{expand}' for a collapsible section.
project_keyYesThe JIRA project key (e.g. 'PROJ', 'DEV', 'ACV2'). This is the prefix of issue keys in your project. Never assume what it might be, always ask the user.
additional_fieldsNo(Optional) JSON string of additional fields to set. Examples: - Set priority: {"priority": {"name": "High"}} - Add labels: {"labels": ["frontend", "urgent"]} - Link to parent (for any issue type): {"parent": "PROJ-123"} - Link to epic: {"epicKey": "EPIC-123"} or {"epic_link": "EPIC-123"} - Set Fix Version/s: {"fixVersions": [{"id": "10020"}]} - Custom fields: {"customfield_10010": "value"}

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are minimal (destructiveHint: false only). The description discloses the write action and the optional Epic/parent linkage, but does not add behavioral details like idempotency, required permissions, or response behavior. This is a gap given the sparse annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the core action and a key capability without waste.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description is brief but the schema is rich and output schema exists. However, it lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., knowing project key) and fails to distinguish from batch creation, so it is not fully complete for the complexity of the tool.

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 covers all 7 parameters with detailed descriptions and examples (100% coverage). The description adds a pointer to Epic link/parent, which is already covered in additional_fields examples, so no significant added value 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 creates a new Jira issue, with optional Epic link or parent for subtasks. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_link_to_epic and jira_create_issue_link, which operate on existing issues.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides context (single issue creation, optional Epic/parent) but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like jira_batch_create_issues or jira_link_to_epic. It implies use for a single issue but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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/hieptran87/atlassian-mcp-server'

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