Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenProject CE MCP

OpenProject CE MCP

by jtauschl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_project_phase_definition

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a single OpenProject project lifecycle phase definition by ID, helping agents inspect phase details for project planning and management.

Instructions

Get a single project lifecycle phase definition by id.

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": {
      "phase_definition_id": "<phase_definition_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_project_phase_definition"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
phase_definition_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameYes
created_atYes
start_gateYes
updated_atYes
finish_gateYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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",
-  "name",
-  "start_gate",
-  "finish_gate",
-  "created_at",
-  "updated_at",
-  "url"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "name",
+  "start_gate",
+  "finish_gate",
+  "created_at",
+  "updated_at"
+]
  2. Addedv0.3.3
  3. Removedv0.3.0
  4. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, yet the description restates nothing beyond 'get a single ... by id' — no note that the id must come from a listing call, no error behavior when the id is unknown. With annotations carrying the safety profile, the description still adds essentially no behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler. It is efficient but arguably too terse given the documentation gaps elsewhere.

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?

A simple getter with an output schema and thorough annotations, so the essentials are covered. The main missing piece is where the phase_definition_id comes from and what distinguishes a phase definition from a project phase.

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 description coverage is 0% for the sole parameter, so the description is the only source of meaning; all it offers is 'by id', without saying what identifies a phase definition or that ids come from list_project_phase_definitions. That is thinner than the documentation burden requires.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single project lifecycle phase definition') and the 'single ... by id' framing distinguishes it from the sibling list_project_phase_definitions. It does not, however, differentiate itself from get_project_phase, which an agent could easily confuse with it.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by contrast with the 'list_' sibling; there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_project_phase or how to obtain a valid id. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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