Skip to main content
Glama

Get work package schema

get_work_package_schema
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the required fields, writable attributes, and custom field options for a work package type in a project, enabling correct creation or update of work packages.

Instructions

Show which fields a work package of this type accepts in this project.

Call it before create_work_package/update_work_package when you need the required fields, when you want a custom field's key or its allowed options, or after a 422 that named a field you do not recognise.

Returns required_fields (writable keys you must supply), fields — every core attribute with {key, name, type, required, writable, has_default, allowed_values} — and custom_fields with {key, name, type, required, writable, options}. allowed_values/options are {id, name} lists for status, category, version and list/user custom fields.

Pitfalls: key is the wire spelling (startDate, customField12) — that is what raw_filters and custom_fields writes use, though writes also accept the display name. A field with writable: false is computed by OpenProject; sending it is an error, not a no-op. allowed_values is null when the API only offers a lookup URL (assignee, project) — resolve those with search_principals or list_projects instead. Long option lists are capped at 50 with a marker in notes.

Ids for both parameters come from get_project_metadata; to read the values actually set on one work package use get_work_package.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refreshNoBypass the cache after an administrator changed the type or its custom fields.
type_idYesNumeric work-package type id from get_project_metadata(project_id=...).types — not the type name.
project_idYesNumeric project id — this endpoint does not accept the string identifier. The schema is per project AND type: the same type carries different custom fields in another project.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNoDegradation notes, e.g. capped allowed-value lists.
fieldsNoCore attributes with type/required/writable.
type_idYesWork-package type the schema was requested for.
project_idYesProject the schema was requested for.
custom_fieldsNoAlways a list; empty when the type has none.
required_fieldsNoWritable keys that must be supplied on create.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds rich behavioral context: wire spelling pitfalls, writable:false being an error, allowed_values null for lookup URLs, a 50-item cap, and cache-bypass behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured with a purpose sentence, explicit usage directions, a clear return-format listing, and a dedicated pitfalls section. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, the description thoroughly covers when to use, what to expect, pitfalls, and parameter provenance. The output schema exists, so the return-format summary is a bonus, and the description is complete for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: project_id must be numeric (not string), type_id is not the name, both ids come from get_project_metadata, and the schema is per project AND type. This enriches the parameter understanding.

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?

The description uses a specific verb+resource construction: 'Show which fields a work package of this type accepts in this project.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_work_package (which reads actual values) and create/update_work_package (which write).

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?

Explicitly states when to call: 'Call it before create_work_package/update_work_package when you need the required fields, when you want a custom field's key or its allowed options, or after a 422 that named a field you do not recognise.' Also names alternatives (search_principals/list_projects) for resolving lookup URLs, providing clear when/when-not context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/kar-thik/openproject-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server