Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenProject CE MCP

OpenProject CE MCP

by jtauschl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_meeting_outcomes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all outcomes recorded for a meeting agenda item, with optional field selection and client-side paging. Use it to review decisions, notes, and linked work packages from OpenProject meetings.

Instructions

List outcomes of a meeting agenda item.

Requires OpenProject 17.6+; the meeting_outcomes endpoint does not exist on 17.4/17.5.

This list is unpaginated server-side; offset/limit are applied client-side by this MCP.

text_limit caps each outcome's notes at that many characters (default: the server's configured OPENPROJECT_TEXT_LIMIT, NOT unlimited). When text is cut, notes_truncated is true and notes_length reports the real length.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoPage size, capped at OPENPROJECT_MAX_PAGE_SIZE.
offsetNo1-based page number; pass the previous result's next_offset.
selectNoFields to return; a requested unset field comes back as null. Allowed: author, created_at, id, kind, meeting_agenda_item_id, notes, notes_length, notes_truncated, updated_at, work_package_id.
text_limitNo
agenda_item_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.4.4

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description layers on non-obvious behavior: the endpoint is unpaginated server-side so offset/limit are applied client-side by this MCP, plus the version gate. The text_limit truncation contract (notes_truncated flag, notes_length real-length reporting, default from server config rather than unlimited) is exactly the kind of silent-surprise behavior worth disclosing.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, then prerequisite, then pagination caveat, then text_limit semantics — a sensible priority order with no filler. Slightly fragmented by hard line breaks and a dangling closing quote, but every sentence carries information.

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?

With no output schema available, the description still explains the relevant returned fields (notes_truncated, notes_length) and the pagination model an agent needs to page correctly. Nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is only 60%; text_limit has no schema description at all, and the description supplies its default source and truncation side effects. It also corrects a potentially misleading schema note by clarifying that limit/offset are enforced client-side because the upstream endpoint is unpaginated.

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 ('List outcomes of a meeting agenda item'), which cleanly separates it from the singular get_meeting_outcome. It does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings, but the agenda-item scoping makes the target unambiguous.

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?

The version prerequisite (17.6+, endpoint absent on 17.4/17.5) is a genuine usage condition. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over get_meeting_outcome or list_meeting_agenda_items, so the when-to-use versus-what is only implied.

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