Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@illodev/taiga-mcp

@illodev/taiga-mcp

by illodev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

taiga_epics_bulk_create

Create multiple epics in Taiga at once: provide a project ID and a newline-separated list of epic subjects. Save time by bulk-creating all epics in one call.

Instructions

Bulk create epics.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "bulk_epics": "<bulk_epics>"
    },
    "name": "taiga_epics_bulk_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bulk_epicsYesNewline-separated epic subjects
project_idYesProject ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

There are no annotations, and the description provides no behavioral context beyond the action 'create'. It does not disclose mutation risks, permission requirements, response behavior, or limits, which is essential for a write operation with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with no wasted words, but it is under-specified. It is a single phrase that serves more as a label than an explanatory description, so it does not earn a higher score for structure.

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?

For a bulk creation tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It conveys the operation and relies on the schema for parameters, but omits details about the newline-separated format, response behavior, and any side effects, making it incomplete for reliable invocation.

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%, with both parameters documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already handles parameter meaning.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Bulk create epics'), clearly indicating the operation. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'taiga_epics_create' by using 'bulk', though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 like 'taiga_epics_create'. The word 'bulk' implies multiple epics, but there is no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools