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

@illodev/taiga-mcp

by illodev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

taiga_wiki_create

Create a wiki page in a Taiga project by providing project ID, slug, and markdown content.

Instructions

Create a wiki page.

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": "<project>",
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "taiga_wiki_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesWiki page slug
contentYesWiki page content (markdown)
projectYesProject ID
watchersNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 disclosure burden. It only restates the create action implied by the tool name and omits edge-case behavior such as duplicate slug handling, permission requirements, return values, and side effects like watcher notifications.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single four-word sentence with zero redundancy and the key action fully front-loaded. It is structurally efficient, though the extreme brevity edges toward under-specification rather than maximally effective conciseness.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and four parameters, a four-word description is inadequate. It omits expected return behavior, conflict handling for duplicate slugs, and preconditions, leaving the agent without sufficient context for confident invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers 75% of parameters (project, slug, content), but the description adds no additional parameter context. The optional 'watchers' parameter remains unexplained in both the schema and the description.

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 states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('a wiki page'), making the tool's intent immediately clear. It distinguishes this from siblings like taiga_wiki_update, taiga_wiki_delete, and taiga_wiki_links_create, since only this tool creates wiki pages.

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?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions for non-use, or that taiga_wiki_update handles modifications to existing pages.

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