Skip to main content
Glama

retrieve_work_item_by_identifier

Fetch a work item using its PROJECT-N identifier to get details like status, assignees, labels, and dates.

Instructions

Retrieve a work item by its full identifier (project prefix + sequence number).

The identifier must be in PROJECT-N format where PROJECT is the project's identifier string and N is the sequence number. Both parts are required.

Valid sparse fields values include: id, name, sequence_id, priority, state, project, workspace, parent, assignees, labels, type_id, start_date, target_date, created_at, updated_at, created_by, updated_by, is_draft, external_source, external_id, estimate_point. Use project (not project_id) to get the project UUID.

If you need the project UUID from a short identifier like "SHO", use list_projects() instead — it returns id and identifier for every project.

Args: work_item_identifier: Full work item identifier in PROJECT-N format expand: Comma-separated fields to expand (e.g., "assignees,labels,state") fields: Comma-separated sparse fieldset (see valid values above) external_id: External system identifier for filtering external_source: External system source name for filtering order_by: Field to order results by

Returns: WorkItemDetail object with expanded relationships

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expandNo
fieldsNo
order_byNo
external_idNo
external_sourceNo
work_item_identifierYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
nameNo
typeNo
pointNo
stateNo
labelsNo
parentNo
projectNo
type_idNo
is_draftNo
priorityNo
assigneesNo
workspaceNo
created_atNo
created_byNo
deleted_atNo
sort_orderNo
start_dateNo
updated_atNo
updated_byNo
archived_atNo
external_idNo
sequence_idNo
target_dateNo
completed_atNo
estimate_pointNo
external_sourceNo
description_htmlNo
description_binaryNo
description_strippedNo
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explains the identifier format, valid sparse fields, the project vs project_id distinction, and the return type. It also provides a concrete tip about using list_projects for UUID resolution. It omits error handling or permission details, but for a retrieve-only operation this is adequate.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening, format explanation, field guidance, and an Args section. The valid fields list is long but necessary for usability. Each section serves a purpose, though it could be marginally tightened without losing value.

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 the output schema exists and the sibling tool list is large, the description covers essential retrieval context, identifier constraints, field semantics, and a key alternative for project UUID resolution. It does not discuss error cases or edge conditions, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a retrieval tool.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates. It lists all six parameters in the Args section with concise explanations, including the exact format for work_item_identifier and a comprehensive list of valid fields values. This goes well beyond the schema and gives agents the needed context.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves a work item by its full identifier (project prefix + sequence number), with a specific format (PROJECT-N). It distinguishes itself from the related list_projects tool by noting it should be used when resolving a project UUID from a short identifier. The verb+resource+format makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It gives explicit guidance on when to use list_projects as an alternative for resolving project UUIDs, and it clearly defines the required identifier format. However, it does not explicitly contrast with retrieve_work_item or search_work_items, leaving some ambiguity about which retrieval tool to prefer when a UUID is already available.

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/leigangzhang/plane-mcp-server-adapter'

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