jcm_releaseVersionMark a Jira version as released by version ID, optionally setting the release date, and return the result with version ID and name.
Mark a Jira version as released. Returns {ok, id, name}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| versionId | Yes | Jira version ID (numeric) | |
| releaseDate | No | Release date (YYYY-MM-DD). Defaults to today. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.10.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructive, idempotent, open-world, and non-read-only behavior. The description adds the return shape {ok, id, name}, but does not add further context on permissions or side effects beyond annotations; it is consistent with them.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the return shape. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple mutation with rich schema and annotations, the description supplies the return shape that would otherwise be missing without an output schema. It could mention error or already-released behavior, but annotations cover idempotency.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, making 3 the appropriate baseline.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('Mark ... as released') and resource ('Jira version'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like createVersion and listVersions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. The action implies releasing an existing version, but the agent must infer the context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.