MCP Linear

linear_createManagedOAuthApplication

Create an alpha child OAuth application owned by the calling app, without the human setup flow. Returns one-time client and optional webhook secrets for programmatic use.

Instructions

Create an alpha child OAuth application owned by the calling OAuth application. This is not the human setup flow and returns one-time client and optional webhook secrets in the MCP result. It cannot set distribution or pre-grant OAuth scopes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	OAuth client name. Must not contain "Linear" or an http(s) URL.
`imageUrl`	No
`developer`	Yes
`grantTypes`	No
`webhookUrl`	No
`description`	No
`developerUrl`	No
`redirectUris`	Yes
`idempotencyKey`	No
`webhookResourceTypes`	No
`confirmSecretExposure`	Yes	Must be true to acknowledge that a one-time secret will be returned in the MCP tool result.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`application`	No
`clientSecret`	No
`webhookSecret`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.4.3Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses that it returns one-time client and optional webhook secrets, and that it cannot set certain scopes. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent. Does not mention all side effects, but sufficient for creation tool.

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 sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, then adds critical distinctions and limitations. Highly efficient.

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?

Given complexity (11 params, output schema exists), description covers core purpose, key constraints, and result type. Could mention 'Managed' and 'alpha' more explicitly, but overall sufficient for an agent to make informed use.

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 low (18%), so description needs to compensate. It adds context for confirmSecretExposure by linking to secret return, but other parameters like imageUrl, grantTypes, webhookUrl are not explained. Description provides overall tool context but not detailed parameter guidance.

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?

Clearly states verb (create), resource (alpha child OAuth application), and distinguishes from human setup flow. Differentiates from sibling OAuth tools by specifying it creates a managed application owned by the calling app.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly states it is not for human setup flow and cannot set distribution or pre-grant scopes, guiding agents to use it for automated initial creation. Could be more explicit about when to use vs other OAuth creation tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server