Skip to main content
Glama
pdogra1299

Bitbucket MCP Server

by pdogra1299
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_pull_requests

Retrieve pull requests from a Bitbucket repository, or omit repository to view your own PRs across all repositories and filter by role.

Instructions

List pull requests in a repository. Omit repository (Server only) to list YOUR PRs across all repos in one call (filter with role).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNoCross-repo mode only
limitNoMax results (default 25)
startNoPagination start (default 0)
stateNoDefault OPEN
authorNoFilter by author username
workspaceYesProject key (e.g., PROJ)
repositoryNoRepository slug; omit for cross-repo dashboard (Server)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changedv3.0.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Maximum number of PRs to return (default: 25)"New value: +"Max results (default 25)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / repository / description
      Previous value: -"Repository slug (e.g., \"my-repo\")"New value: +"Repository slug; omit for cross-repo dashboard (Server)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / role
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Cross-repo mode only",
+  "enum": [
+    "AUTHOR",
+    "REVIEWER",
+    "PARTICIPANT"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / start / description
      Previous value: -"Start index for pagination (default: 0)"New value: +"Pagination start (default 0)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / state / description
      Previous value: -"Filter by PR state: OPEN, MERGED, DECLINED, ALL (default: OPEN)"New value: +"Default OPEN"
    • changedInput schema / properties / workspace / description
      Previous value: -"Bitbucket workspace/project key (e.g., \"PROJ\")"New value: +"Project key (e.g., PROJ)"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "workspace",
-  "repository"
-]New value: +[
+  "workspace"
+]
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the dual-mode behavior (cross-repo aggregation gated on omitting repository, which is Server-only), but says nothing about return format, pagination, ordering, or auth requirements for a 7-param list tool.

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?

Two sentences with strong front-loading: the primary action leads, and the conditional cross-repo mode follows. Dense but no wasted words; could be marginally clearer about defaults.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With 100% schema coverage and 7 params, the schema handles parameter mechanics. The description covers the key mode split but omits return shape and result ordering; for a moderately complex list tool with no output schema, an agent still lacks some context on what comes back.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema (including `role` as 'Cross-repo mode only' and `repository` omission). The description mostly restates the schema's cross-repo interaction, adding emphasis rather than new semantics — baseline 3 fits.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List pull requests') plus a scope variant (repo-scoped vs cross-repo dashboard), which cleanly separates it from get_pull_request. It never names a sibling explicitly, but the resource and mode distinction make its role obvious.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives real when-to-use guidance: omit `repository` to aggregate YOUR PRs across all repos and refine with `role`. It does not name alternative tools (e.g., get_pull_request for a single PR) or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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