Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenProject CE MCP

OpenProject CE MCP

by jtauschl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

create_meeting_agenda_item

Add an agenda item to an OpenProject meeting, including simple items or work packages, with optional notes, section, and planned duration.

Instructions

Add an item to a meeting's agenda.

Requires OpenProject 17.6+. Rejected while the meeting is closed. For a work package, its project must be inside OPENPROJECT_WRITE_PROJECTS. To record a result of a discussed item use create_meeting_outcome.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNoNotes in Markdown, at most 50,000 characters.
titleYesItem title, at most 255 characters; always required here.
confirmNofalse: preview only, nothing changes. true: applies it; get the user's approval of the preview first.
item_typeNo"simple" (a titled item) or "work_package" (an item for the work package given in work_package_id, which it then requires).
meeting_idYesMeeting id, from list_meetings.
work_package_idNoWork package id (e.g. 952) or display id (e.g. "PROJ-51"), not the bare number 51.
meeting_section_idNoSection of this meeting to add the item to, from list_meeting_sections; default: the last.
duration_in_minutesNoPlanned duration in minutes, 0 to 1440.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.4.4

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real context beyond annotations: version gating, the closed-meeting rejection rule, and the OPENPROJECT_WRITE_PROJECTS write guard, which annotations alone (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) do not convey. It stops short of warning that the call is non-idempotent, i.e. repeating it creates duplicate items, which is the one behavior an agent most needs to know.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences: purpose first, then the key precondition, then the routing rule to the alternative tool. No filler and no repetition of schema text.

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?

For an 8-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, permissions, and sibling routing well, while confirm/preview semantics and id defaults are covered by the rich schema. Minor gap: nothing about ordering or duplicate creation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a cross-parameter constraint the schema cannot express: a work_package item's project must fall inside OPENPROJECT_WRITE_PROJECTS. It does not otherwise elaborate on parameters such as confirm, which the schema already documents well.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add an item to a meeting's agenda') and explicitly names the sibling it is not for ('To record a result of a discussed item use create_meeting_outcome'), so an agent can pick it apart from the outcome tools without opening schemas.

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?

Gives when-to-use, when-not ('Rejected while the meeting is closed'), prerequisites (OpenProject 17.6+, project inside OPENPROJECT_WRITE_PROJECTS) and the alternative tool for the adjacent use case. Nothing essential is left to inference.

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