Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenProject CE MCP

OpenProject CE MCP

by jtauschl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_membership

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a project membership by ID, returning the user or group, project, and role names. Use it to inspect a specific membership after finding its ID via list_project_memberships.

Instructions

Get one project membership by id: the user or group, the project and the role names.

To list a project's members use list_project_memberships.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
membership_idYesMembership id, from list_project_memberships.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
role_idsYes
can_updateYes
created_atNo
project_idYes
role_namesYes
updated_atNo
principal_idYes
project_nameYes
principal_nameYes
can_update_immediatelyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.4.4
  2. Removedv0.4.0
  3. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.7
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedOutput schema / properties / url
      Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Url",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "principal_id",
-  "principal_name",
-  "project_id",
-  "project_name",
-  "role_ids",
-  "role_names",
-  "can_update",
-  "can_update_immediately",
-  "url"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "principal_id",
+  "principal_name",
+  "project_id",
+  "project_name",
+  "role_ids",
+  "role_names",
+  "can_update",
+  "can_update_immediately"
+]
  4. Addedv0.3.3
  5. Removedv0.3.0
  6. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds little beyond the annotation layer: it mentions returned entities but does not discuss permissions, errors, or rate limits, and return detail is also largely covered by the output schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and the second sentence is a useful routing hint rather than filler. No redundant restatement of the tool name.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple read-by-id tool with an output schema, complete annotations, and a fully documented single parameter, the description gives enough selection and invocation context. Missing error semantics are not critical here.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the sole membership_id parameter is already documented as coming from list_project_memberships. The description does not add format, range, or lookup semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (Get) and resource (one project membership) by id, and enumerates the returned components (user/group, project, role names). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling list_project_memberships, so an agent can choose between single-item retrieval and listing.

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 names the alternative list_project_memberships and the condition that selects it (listing a project's members). It implies this tool is for fetching one known membership id, though it does not spell out when error or invalid-id cases should be handled.

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