Skip to main content
Glama
proprock

jira-mini-mcp

by proprock
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

search_issues

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Jira Cloud issues using JQL queries. Retrieve matching issues with pagination and customizable fields for targeted results.

Instructions

Search Jira Cloud issues with JQL. Returns items and an opaque next_page_token (null on the last page); pass it back as page_token for the next page. limit is 1..100 (default 20); 0 is invalid. fields replaces the default fields entirely -- default: summary, status, issuetype, priority, assignee, updated, project. fields=[] returns only the issue key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jqlYes
limitNo
fieldsNo
page_tokenNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "search_issuesDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent hints; the description adds substantial non-obvious behavior beyond them: pagination contract (next_page_token null on last page, pass back as page_token), limit validation (1..100, 0 invalid), and the field-replacement semantics including the fields=[] edge case. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences with the main purpose front-loaded, followed by pagination, then limit, then fields. Each clause earns its place, though the fields sentence is dense and could arguably be split for readability.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers the tricky parts of this tool: pagination mechanics, validation rules, and non-default field behavior. It doesn't detail the shape of the returned items beyond the default field list, but the field list itself gives a strong hint; nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the entire parameter-documentation burden, and it does: jql is implied as the query language, limit gets explicit valid range and default, fields gets full replacement semantics plus a documented default set, and page_token gets its opaque-token contract. This fully compensates for the empty schema descriptions.

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 (search), resource (Jira Cloud issues), and method (JQL), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_issue (single issue retrieval) and get_comments. The purpose is unmistakable and requires no inference.

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 explains how to use pagination, limit, and fields correctly, which is operational guidance. However, it never names sibling tools like get_issue for single-issue lookup or says when to prefer them over this search tool, leaving use-vs-alternative decisions implied rather than explicit.

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