Skip to main content
Glama

get-issue-root-causes

Retrieve root cause categories and causes to assign to issues in Autodesk Construction Cloud projects. Use this tool to analyze and document issue origins for better project management.

Instructions

Retrieves a list of supported root cause categories and root causes that you can allocate to an issue in Autodesk Construction Cloud.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYes

Implementation Reference

  • The asynchronous callback function that executes the core logic of the 'get-issue-root-causes' tool. It authenticates via access token, strips 'b.' prefix from projectId, fetches root cause categories using IssuesClient, and returns formatted results.
    callback: async ({ projectId }) => {
        // TODO: add pagination support
        const accessToken = await getAccessToken(["data:read"]);
        const issuesClient = new IssuesClient();
        projectId = projectId.replace("b.", ""); // the projectId should not contain the "b." prefix
        const rootCauses = await issuesClient.getRootCauseCategories(projectId, { accessToken });
        if (!rootCauses.results) {
            throw new Error("No root causes found");
        }
        return {
            content: rootCauses.results.map((rootCause) => ({ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(rootCause) }))
        };
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameter 'projectId' as a non-empty string.
    const schema = {
        projectId: z.string().nonempty()
    };
  • src/server.ts:12-14 (registration)
    Dynamic registration loop that registers the 'get-issue-root-causes' tool (imported via tools/index.js) by calling server.tool() with its title, description, schema, and callback.
    for (const tool of Object.values(tools)) {
        server.tool(tool.title, tool.description, tool.schema, tool.callback);
    }
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 the tool retrieves a list, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't cover aspects like permissions required, response format, pagination, rate limits, or error handling. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 that front-loads the key action and resource. There is no wasted language, and it directly communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary details.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but omits critical details like parameter meaning, behavioral traits, and return values, making it insufficient for a tool with one required parameter in a complex domain like construction cloud issues.

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 input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It doesn't mention the 'projectId' parameter at all, failing to explain its role or format. However, with only one parameter, the baseline is higher, but the description adds no value beyond what the schema provides, resulting in an average score.

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 ('Retrieves a list') and the resource ('supported root cause categories and root causes'), specifying they are for allocating to issues in Autodesk Construction Cloud. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get-issues' or 'get-issue-comments' by focusing on root cause metadata rather than issues themselves, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage when allocating root causes to issues, providing some context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get-issue-types' for issue metadata) or any prerequisites. It doesn't specify exclusions or detailed scenarios.

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/petrbroz/aps-mcp-server'

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