Skip to main content
Glama
jootsuki

Backlog MCP Server

by jootsuki

getProjects

Retrieve all projects from Backlog to view available workspaces and manage project data through the MCP server interface.

Instructions

Backlogのプロジェクト一覧を取得します

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP CallToolRequest handler case for 'getProjects': calls backlogClient.getProjects() and returns the JSON stringified result as text content.
    case 'getProjects': {
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(
              await this.backlogClient.getProjects(),
              null,
              2
            ),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:85-88 (registration)
    Registration of the 'getProjects' tool in the ListTools response, including name, description, and input schema.
      name: 'getProjects',
      description: 'Backlogのプロジェクト一覧を取得します',
      inputSchema: getProjectsSchema,
    },
  • Input schema for getProjects tool: empty object since no parameters are required.
    export const getProjectsSchema = {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {},
      additionalProperties: false
    } as const;
  • BacklogClient.getProjects() method: fetches projects from Backlog API /projects endpoint.
    async getProjects(): Promise<Project[]> {
      try {
        const response = await this.client.get('/projects');
        return response.data;
      } catch (error) {
        if (axios.isAxiosError(error)) {
          throw new Error(`Backlog API error: ${error.response?.data.message ?? error.message}`);
        }
        throw error;
      }
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this retrieves project lists but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: no information about pagination, sorting, filtering capabilities, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what format the data returns. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 a single, efficient Japanese sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. There's zero wasted language or unnecessary elaboration. It's appropriately sized for a simple list-retrieval tool and front-loads the essential information.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the return data looks like (project objects, IDs, names, metadata), whether there are limitations on the listing, or how results are structured. For a data retrieval tool with no structured output documentation, the description should provide more context about the response format.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema). The description doesn't need to explain any parameters since none exist. It appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose rather than parameter details. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, as there's nothing to compensate for.

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 clearly states the action ('取得します' - get/retrieve) and resource ('プロジェクト一覧' - project list) in Japanese. It specifies this tool retrieves project lists from Backlog, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle issues. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential sibling project tools (though none are listed).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention whether this is for listing all projects, filtered projects, or specific use cases. With sibling tools focused on issues (getIssue, searchIssues, updateIssue), there's no comparison or context about when project listing is appropriate versus issue operations.

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/jootsuki/backlog-mcp-server'

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