Skip to main content
Glama
jl-0

JIRA MCP Server

by jl-0

jira_get_issue

Retrieve detailed information for a specific JIRA issue by its key, including summary, status, assignee, and custom fields. Specify only the needed fields to optimize response size.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific JIRA issue by its key (e.g., "IDS-10194"). Returns comprehensive issue details including summary, description, status, assignee, and custom fields. CRITICAL: Always use the fields parameter to request only specific fields needed - requesting all fields or omitting this parameter returns excessive data and may fail. For custom fields, use field discovery workflow first: (1) Get issue type with fields: ["issuetype", "project"], (2) Use jira_get_issue_type_fields to find field names/IDs, (3) Request only needed fields by name or customfield_XXXX ID. Example: fields: ["summary", "customfield_10001", "status"].

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expandNoOptional array of additional data to expand. Example: ["changelog", "transitions", "renderedFields"]. Warning: Some expand options may significantly increase response size
fieldsNoOptional array of specific fields to return. Example: ["summary", "status", "description", "assignee", "reporter", "priority"]. If omitted, returns common fields: summary, status, priority, assignee, reporter, created, updated, description, issuetype, project, resolution, resolutiondate, duedate, labels, components, fixVersions, versions
propertiesNoOptional array of issue properties to include. Example: ["prop1", "prop2"]. Use "*all" to include all properties
issueIdOrKeyYesThe JIRA issue ID or key to retrieve. Example: "IDS-10194" or "PROJ-123"
updateHistoryNoWhether to update the issue's history of views
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that omitting the fields parameter returns excessive data and may fail, and lists the return categories (summary, status, assignee, custom fields). It could add failure behavior for invalid issue keys, but the warning and return detail are meaningful and help set expectations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and example, followed by a critical warning and a numbered workflow. It is dense but every sentence carries operational value; there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 5 parameters with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the main usage pattern, critical performance guidance, and custom-field handling. It does not explain expand/properties/updateHistory behavior, but those are already described in the schema, so the description is complete enough for a tool of this complexity.

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

Parameters5/5

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

While the input schema already covers all 5 parameters with examples (100% coverage), the description adds critical semantics beyond the schema: always use fields to limit payload, omitting it can cause failure, and custom fields require a structured discovery workflow. This is substantial added value for parameter use.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific JIRA issue by its key'), with an example key format. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like jira_search_issues (searching) and jira_get_issue_comments (comments) by focusing on retrieving detailed single-issue data.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit, actionable guidance: always pass only needed fields, warns that omitting fields returns excessive data and may fail, and prescribes a step-by-step custom-field discovery workflow using jira_get_issue_type_fields. This gives clear when-to-use and how-to-use context beyond the schema.

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/jl-0/JIRA-API-MCP'

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