Skip to main content
Glama
privacyfence

PrivacyFence

Official
by privacyfence
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

jira_create_issue

Create a new Jira issue with project key, summary, and optional fields; returns the issue key and requires user approval via PrivacyFence.

Instructions

Create a new Jira issue. Returns the created issue, with its new key, in the same shape jira_get_issue returns minus comments. Get project_key from jira_list_projects. Requires user approval.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonYesOne sentence: why are you calling this tool right now?
summaryYesOne-line title of the issue. Must not be empty.
priorityNoName of the priority, e.g. 'High', 'Medium' or 'Low'. Empty uses the project's default priority.
issue_typeNoName of the issue type, e.g. 'Task', 'Bug' or 'Story'; it must exist in the project. Default 'Task'.Task
descriptionNoPlain-text description of the issue. Empty means no description.
project_keyYesKey of the project to create the issue in, e.g. MYPROJ, from jira_list_projects (its key field).
assignee_account_idNoAtlassian account id to assign the issue to, from jira_find_users (its account_id field). Empty assigns nobody.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv5.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / assignee_account_id
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Atlassian account id to assign the issue to, from jira_find_users (its account_id field). Empty assigns nobody.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / description / description
      Added value: +"Plain-text description of the issue. Empty means no description."
    • changedInput schema / properties / issue_type / description
      Previous value: -"e.g. Task, Bug, Story"New value: +"Name of the issue type, e.g. 'Task', 'Bug' or 'Story'; it must exist in the project. Default 'Task'."
    • changedInput schema / properties / priority / description
      Previous value: -"e.g. High, Medium, Low"New value: +"Name of the priority, e.g. 'High', 'Medium' or 'Low'. Empty uses the project's default priority."
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_key / description
      Previous value: -"e.g. MYPROJ"New value: +"Key of the project to create the issue in, e.g. MYPROJ, from jira_list_projects (its key field)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / summary / description
      Added value: +"One-line title of the issue. Must not be empty."
  3. First observedv5.3.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive write. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: an approval gate and a precise return contract ('new key... same shape jira_get_issue returns minus comments'), which the annotations do not convey.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then return shape, prerequisite, and approval constraint in order of usefulness. No filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by describing the return value relative to jira_get_issue, and it discloses the approval requirement and the project_key source. Minor gaps remain (e.g., no mention of duplicate handling or post-approval failure modes), but nothing essential to a correct call is missing.

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 100%, so all 7 parameters (including the reason, summary, type, priority, assignee fields) are already fully documented in the schema. The description's only parameter-adjacent hint, sourcing project_key from jira_list_projects, duplicates the schema's own note, so it adds no meaning beyond structured data.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new Jira issue'), which is unambiguously distinct from siblings like jira_update_issue, jira_transition_issue, and jira_add_comment. An agent can select this tool without opening the schema.

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 prerequisites — project_key comes from jira_list_projects, and user approval is required — which tells the agent how to prepare before calling. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to comment on an existing issue instead of creating one), keeping it 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