Skip to main content
Glama
leorosignoli

JIRA Zephyr MCP Server

by leorosignoli

get_test_execution_status

Retrieve test execution progress and statistics for a specific test cycle in JIRA Zephyr to monitor testing status and identify completion levels.

Instructions

Get test execution progress and statistics

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cycleIdYesTest cycle ID

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function implementing the get_test_execution_status tool. It validates input, fetches execution summary from Zephyr client, computes progress metrics, and returns structured status data.
    export const getTestExecutionStatus = async (input: GetTestExecutionStatusInput) => {
      const validatedInput = getTestExecutionStatusSchema.parse(input);
      
      try {
        const summary = await getZephyrClient().getTestExecutionSummary(validatedInput.cycleId);
        
        return {
          success: true,
          data: {
            cycleId: validatedInput.cycleId,
            summary: {
              total: summary.total,
              passed: summary.passed,
              failed: summary.failed,
              blocked: summary.blocked,
              inProgress: summary.inProgress,
              notExecuted: summary.notExecuted,
              passRate: Math.round(summary.passRate),
            },
            progress: {
              completed: summary.passed + summary.failed + summary.blocked,
              remaining: summary.notExecuted + summary.inProgress,
              completionPercentage: summary.total > 0 
                ? Math.round(((summary.passed + summary.failed + summary.blocked) / summary.total) * 100)
                : 0,
            },
          },
        };
      } catch (error: any) {
        return {
          success: false,
          error: error.response?.data?.message || error.message,
        };
      }
    };
  • Zod schema defining the input structure for get_test_execution_status tool, requiring a cycleId.
    export const getTestExecutionStatusSchema = z.object({
      cycleId: z.string().min(1, 'Cycle ID is required'),
    });
  • TypeScript type inferred from the getTestExecutionStatusSchema for input validation.
    export type GetTestExecutionStatusInput = z.infer<typeof getTestExecutionStatusSchema>;
  • src/index.ts:148-157 (registration)
    Tool registration in the TOOLS array exported for ListToolsRequest, defining name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'get_test_execution_status',
      description: 'Get test execution progress and statistics',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          cycleId: { type: 'string', description: 'Test cycle ID' },
        },
        required: ['cycleId'],
      },
  • src/index.ts:401-410 (registration)
    Dispatch logic in CallToolRequest handler switch statement: validates arguments using schema and invokes the getTestExecutionStatus handler.
    case 'get_test_execution_status': {
      const validatedArgs = validateInput<GetTestExecutionStatusInput>(getTestExecutionStatusSchema, args, 'get_test_execution_status');
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(await getTestExecutionStatus(validatedArgs), null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves 'progress and statistics' but doesn't clarify whether this is a read-only operation, what data format is returned, if there are rate limits, or authentication requirements. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with test execution data.

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 directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'progress and statistics' entail (e.g., metrics, statuses, timestamps), how results are structured, or potential errors. For a tool with one parameter but no output details, this leaves too much unspecified.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'cycleId' documented as 'Test cycle ID'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond this, so it meets the baseline for adequate but unremarkable coverage when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('test execution progress and statistics'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'execute_test' or 'generate_test_report', which prevents a perfect score.

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 test cycle ID), exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools like 'list_test_cycles' or 'execute_test', leaving usage context unclear.

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