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

@illodev/taiga-mcp

by illodev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

taiga_users_stats

Get user statistics from Taiga by providing a user ID. View activity, performance, and contribution metrics for any project member.

Instructions

Get user stats.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "taiga_users_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUser ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
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 only implies a read operation ('Get') but does not disclose what data is returned, whether permissions are needed, or any side effects.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a two-word fragment that is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks necessary detail to guide an agent, making it more an unhelpful truncation than a well-structured summary.

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?

Although the tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description is too minimal to convey what 'user stats' means or how the result is structured. Sibling tools like taiga_users_get and taiga_projects_stats highlight the missing context.

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?

The input schema fully documents the only parameter (id, 'User ID'), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('user stats'), but 'stats' is vague and does not specify what statistics are included. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like taiga_users_get or taiga_projects_stats.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or why one would choose this over taiga_users_get or other stats tools.

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