Jira Cloud MCP Server

delete_issue_link

Remove a specified issue link from a Jira project using its unique link ID. Simplifies issue relationship management by allowing quick deletion of connected issues.

Instructions

Delete issue link

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": {
      "linkId": "<linkId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_issue_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`linkId`	Yes	The ID of the issue link.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Delete issue link'. It does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, requires special permissions, or affects related data. The description carries no behavioral information beyond the operation itself.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short, but it merely repeats the tool name and does not add value. Under-specification is not true conciseness; a useful description would include at least one distinguishing detail or usage hint.

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?

For a deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify scope, side effects, or distinctions from related deletion tools. None of this is present, leaving an agent to guess whether this applies to standard issue links or remote issue links.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter linkId, so the schema already explains the parameter. The description adds no additional meaning about linkId format, provenance, or how to obtain it, but the baseline of 3 applies due to full schema 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 states the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'issue link', which is clear and unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool delete_remote_issue_link_by_id, which is a related but distinct deletion operation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_remote_issue_link_by_id or get_issue_link. The description simply restates the tool name with no context for when it is the appropriate choice.

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

Deploy Server