Skip to main content
Glama
leorosignoli

JIRA Zephyr MCP Server

by leorosignoli

create_test_plan

Create structured test plans in JIRA Zephyr to organize testing activities, define scope, and track progress for software quality assurance.

Instructions

Create a new test plan in Zephyr

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesTest plan name
descriptionNoTest plan description (optional)
projectKeyYesJIRA project key
startDateNoPlanned start date (ISO format, optional)
endDateNoPlanned end date (ISO format, optional)

Implementation Reference

  • Main tool handler: validates input using Zod schema, calls ZephyrClient to create test plan, formats and returns success/error response.
    export const createTestPlan = async (input: CreateTestPlanInput) => {
      const validatedInput = createTestPlanSchema.parse(input);
      
      try {
        const testPlan = await getZephyrClient().createTestPlan({
          name: validatedInput.name,
          description: validatedInput.description,
          projectKey: validatedInput.projectKey,
          startDate: validatedInput.startDate,
          endDate: validatedInput.endDate,
        });
        
        return {
          success: true,
          data: {
            id: testPlan.id,
            key: testPlan.key,
            name: testPlan.name,
            description: testPlan.description,
            projectId: testPlan.projectId,
            status: testPlan.status,
            createdOn: testPlan.createdOn,
            createdBy: testPlan.createdBy.displayName,
          },
        };
      } catch (error: any) {
        return {
          success: false,
          error: error.response?.data?.message || error.message,
        };
      }
    };
  • Zod schema for input validation and TypeScript type inference for CreateTestPlanInput.
    export const createTestPlanSchema = z.object({
      name: z.string().min(1, 'Name is required'),
      description: z.string().optional(),
      projectKey: z.string().min(1, 'Project key is required'),
      startDate: z.string().optional(),
      endDate: z.string().optional(),
    });
  • src/index.ts:77-90 (registration)
    Tool registration in MCP server's TOOLS list, including name, description, and static JSON inputSchema for discovery.
      name: 'create_test_plan',
      description: 'Create a new test plan in Zephyr',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          name: { type: 'string', description: 'Test plan name' },
          description: { type: 'string', description: 'Test plan description (optional)' },
          projectKey: { type: 'string', description: 'JIRA project key' },
          startDate: { type: 'string', description: 'Planned start date (ISO format, optional)' },
          endDate: { type: 'string', description: 'Planned end date (ISO format, optional)' },
        },
        required: ['name', 'projectKey'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:341-351 (registration)
    MCP CallToolRequest handler switch case that validates args and invokes the createTestPlan tool function.
    case 'create_test_plan': {
      const validatedArgs = validateInput<CreateTestPlanInput>(createTestPlanSchema, args, 'create_test_plan');
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(await createTestPlan(validatedArgs), null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • ZephyrClient helper method that performs the actual HTTP POST to Zephyr Scale API to create the test plan.
    async createTestPlan(data: {
      name: string;
      description?: string;
      projectKey: string;
      startDate?: string;
      endDate?: string;
    }): Promise<ZephyrTestPlan> {
      const payload = {
        name: data.name,
        objective: data.description,
        projectKey: data.projectKey,
        plannedStartDate: data.startDate,
        plannedEndDate: data.endDate,
      };
    
      const response = await this.client.post('/testplans', payload);
      return response.data;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates a new test plan, implying a write operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether creation is idempotent, error handling, or what happens on success (e.g., returns a plan ID). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Create a new test plan') and specifies the context ('in Zephyr'). There is zero waste or redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place, and it's appropriately sized for a simple creation tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (a write operation with 5 parameters) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like permissions or outcomes, and while the schema documents parameters, the description fails to add context for usage or integration with siblings. For a creation tool in a test management system, more guidance is needed to be fully helpful.

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?

The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides. Schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters documented (e.g., 'name', 'projectKey', optional dates in ISO format). The description doesn't explain parameter relationships, constraints, or usage examples. Baseline is 3 since the schema does the heavy lifting, but no extra value is added.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Create') and resource ('new test plan in Zephyr'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_test_case' or 'create_test_cycle' by specifying it's for test plans, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them. The description avoids tautology by not just restating the name.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a JIRA project), compare to similar tools like 'list_test_plans' for viewing existing plans, or specify use cases (e.g., for organizing test cases). Usage is implied only by the action 'create', with no explicit context or exclusions provided.

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/leorosignoli/jira-zephyr-mcp'

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