Skip to main content
Glama
nulab

Backlog MCP Server

get_issue

Retrieve details about a specific issue from Backlog project management using either its numeric ID or issue key to access project information.

Instructions

Returns information about a specific issue

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issueIdNoThe numeric ID of the issue (e.g., 12345)
issueKeyNoThe key of the issue (e.g., 'PROJ-123')

Implementation Reference

  • The async handler function that resolves the issue identifier (ID or key) and retrieves the issue details using the Backlog client.
    handler: async ({ issueId, issueKey }) => {
      const result = resolveIdOrKey('issue', { id: issueId, key: issueKey }, t);
      if (!result.ok) {
        throw result.error;
      }
      return backlog.getIssue(result.value);
    },
  • Zod input schema for the get_issue tool, defining optional issueId (number) or issueKey (string) parameters.
    const getIssueSchema = buildToolSchema((t) => ({
      issueId: z
        .number()
        .optional()
        .describe(
          t('TOOL_GET_ISSUE_ISSUE_ID', 'The numeric ID of the issue (e.g., 12345)')
        ),
      issueKey: z
        .string()
        .optional()
        .describe(
          t('TOOL_GET_ISSUE_ISSUE_KEY', "The key of the issue (e.g., 'PROJ-123')")
        ),
    }));
  • Instantiation and registration of the get_issue tool within the 'issue' toolset group.
    getIssueTool(backlog, helper),
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 it 'returns information' but doesn't specify if it's read-only (implied by 'get'), requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens on errors (e.g., invalid ID). For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Returns information') and appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, 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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return values (e.g., format, fields), error conditions, or behavioral traits like authentication needs. For a tool with 2 parameters and rich sibling context, it should provide more context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters ('issueId' and 'issueKey') well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying if both parameters are required, mutually exclusive, or how they map to the issue. Baseline 3 is appropriate 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.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Returns information about a specific issue' clearly states the verb ('returns') and resource ('issue'), but it's vague about what type of information is returned (e.g., details, status, metadata) and doesn't distinguish it from similar siblings like 'get_issues' (plural) or 'get_issue_comments'. It 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an issue ID/key), exclusions, or compare it to siblings like 'get_issues' for listing multiple issues or 'get_issue_comments' for comments. Usage is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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/nulab/backlog-mcp-server'

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