Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
jira-lite-mcp

jira-lite-mcp

by pilloom
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

jira_search

Search Jira issues using JQL queries to find tickets by project, status, assignee, or sprint. Returns one page of results with indication of more available.

Instructions

Busca issues en Jira usando una consulta JQL. Útil para encontrar tickets por proyecto, estado, asignación, sprint, etc. Devuelve los issues de una página junto con si quedan más resultados; la API de búsqueda no informa del total de coincidencias.

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": {
      "jql": "<jql>"
    },
    "name": "jira_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jqlYesConsulta JQL de Jira. Ejemplo: project = ATY AND status != Done
limitNoNúmero máximo de issues a devolver. Por defecto 20

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (returns one page, no total count estimate). It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only search tool, this is acceptable.

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?

Two sentences, no waste. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by a key behavioral limitation. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, how it behaves (pagination), and its limitation. No obvious missing context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds a JQL example and explains the limit default (20), and clarifies pagination behavior, providing value beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool searches Jira issues using JQL, specifies common use cases (by project, status, assignment, sprint), and differentiates from siblings like jira_get_issue by explaining it returns a page of results.

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?

The description implies when to use (searching via JQL) but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives. Sibling tools handle specific operations like single issue retrieval or creation, providing implicit differentiation.

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