Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HacknPlan MCP

HacknPlan MCP

by jompereira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

reopen_milestone

Reopen an archived milestone to continue tracking its progress. Provide project and milestone IDs to reactivate it.

Instructions

Reopen a previously closed (archived) milestone

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "milestoneId": "<milestoneId>"
    },
    "name": "reopen_milestone"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYes
milestoneIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Absent annotations; description only says 'reopen', implying a state change. Does not disclose permissions requirements, side effects, response format, or error conditions (e.g., if milestone is already open).

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?

Single 7-word sentence, front-loaded with action and condition. No wasted words.

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?

For a simple mutation with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the core purpose. However, it lacks details on return value, error handling, and prerequisites, leaving gaps for an agent.

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?

Schema coverage 0%; description does not explain projectId or milestoneId parameters. The names are self-evident, but description adds no 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 'Reopen a previously closed (archived) milestone' clearly states the action (reopen), the resource (milestone), and the condition (previously closed/archived). It distinguishes from sibling tools like close_milestone and delete_milestone.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., update_milestone, replace_milestone). Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., milestone must be closed) or cases where reopening is inappropriate.

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