Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Jira Cloud MCP Server

Jira Cloud MCP Server

by pascalhubacher
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

submit_bulk_edit

Apply bulk edits to multiple Jira issues by selecting issue IDs or keys, specifying field values and actions, and controlling notifications.

Instructions

Bulk edit issues

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "submit_bulk_edit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesThe request body containing the issues to be edited and the new field values.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
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, but it only states the action. It does not mention that this is a mutating bulk operation affecting many issues, that sendBulkNotification can be configured, or whether the edit is reversible.

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?

At three words, there is no redundancy, but this reads as under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A tool with a nested required body needs more structured detail to support correct invocation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a bulk mutation tool with three required inner fields, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description supplies no selection context, usage constraints, or side-effect warnings. The definition is far too thin for an agent to call this tool confidently.

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 effectively high because the body property is described, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter meaning: it does not explain editedFieldsInput format, valid selectedActions values, or how issue IDs/keys are referenced.

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 'Bulk edit issues' supplies a clear verb and resource, so an agent can see this operates on multiple issues at once. However, it does not distinguish it from sibling bulk tools like submit_bulk_move, submit_bulk_delete, or submit_bulk_transition, nor from edit_issue.

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 about when to use this tool versus the other bulk operations or edit_issue. No alternatives, exclusions, or conditions are mentioned, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools