Atlassian Bamboo MCP Server

by norus

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

bamboo_trigger_build

Trigger a new build for any Bamboo plan by specifying the plan key, optional stage, custom revision, and variables.

Instructions

Trigger a build for a Bamboo plan

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "plan_key": "<plan_key>"
    },
    "name": "bamboo_trigger_build"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`stage`	No	Specific stage to execute
`plan_key`	Yes	The plan key to build (e.g., "PROJ-PLAN")
`variables`	No	Bamboo variables to pass to the build (key-value pairs)
`custom_revision`	No	Custom VCS revision to build
`execute_all_stages`	No	Execute all stages (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as asynchronicity, side effects, or return behavior. The agent cannot infer whether this is a long-running operation or what happens on completion.

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 a single, concise sentence that states the core purpose without extraneous details. It is front-loaded and efficiently uses space, though it could benefit from a bit more context.

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 has 5 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return format, error handling, or whether the build is triggered synchronously, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter descriptions are already present. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 action ('Trigger a build') and the resource ('a Bamboo plan'). It distinguishes from sibling `bamboo_trigger_deployment` by specifying 'build' vs 'deployment', though not explicitly differentiating from other similar tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., `bamboo_get_build_result` for checking status). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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