Skip to main content
Glama
qase-tms

Qase MCP Server

Official
by qase-tms
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript
Remote

Get record

qase_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a single known Qase record by entity type and ID. Use when you already have the exact ID; for multiple or filtered records, use qql_search instead.

Instructions

Fetch one known record by type and ID: case, suite, run, result, plan, defect, milestone, environment, shared_step, shared_parameter, configuration, attachment, author, user, review, or custom_field. code is required for project-scoped entities and can be omitted for global ones (user, author, attachment, custom_field). Narrow the payload with fields, or pass ["*"] for everything. Use this only when you already know the ID and want a single record. For several records, for anything filtered or cross-project, or when you are about to call this in a loop, use qql_search instead — one search returns the whole page at once. Cost: one API call, 0.3-0.5s. Ten of these in sequence measured 5.3s against 1.2s for a single qql_search returning the same ten records, so a loop over IDs is roughly four times slower and ten times more calls.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesEntity ID (number) or hash (string)
codeNoProject code (required for most entities)
entityYesEntity type to fetch
fieldsNoOptional field projection — only return these top-level fields. Pass ["*"] for all fields.
includeNoComma-separated list of related entities to include in the response. Cases and runs already request their external issue links by default ("external_issues" / "external_issue"); pass this only to override that.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.2.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / entity / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "case",
-  "suite",
-  "run",
-  "result",
-  "plan",
-  "defect",
-  "milestone",
-  "environment",
-  "shared_step",
-  "shared_parameter",
-  "configuration",
-  "attachment",
-  "author",
-  "user",
-  "custom_field"
-]New value: +[
+  "case",
+  "suite",
+  "run",
+  "result",
+  "plan",
+  "defect",
+  "milestone",
+  "environment",
+  "shared_step",
+  "shared_parameter",
+  "configuration",
+  "attachment",
+  "author",
+  "user",
+  "review",
+  "custom_field"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / include
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma-separated list of related entities to include in the response. Cases and runs already request their external issue links by default (\"external_issues\" / \"external_issue\"); pass this only to override that.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Addedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description goes further by adding cost/latency data, a loop-vs-search performance comparison, entity-scoped code requirements, and default include behavior for external issue links — all useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 information-dense but not padded: purpose first, then usage constraints, then the alternative with concrete performance evidence. The measured benchmark numbers are slightly detailed but directly support the warning against looping.

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 five-parameter tool covering many entity types with no output schema, this description leaves little to inference. It covers invocation pattern, entity scoping, field narrowing, include defaults, alternatives, and performance tradeoffs. Only exact return shape is absent, which is not critical for a single-record fetch.

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% and each parameter already has a description, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful nuance: code is required for project-scoped entities but can be omitted for global ones, fields narrows the payload, and include overrides the default external-issue links for cases/runs.

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?

Clearly states the action ('Fetch one known record by type and ID') and enumerates the supported entity types, so an agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It also distinguishes itself from qql_search by noting it is for a single known record.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says when to use this tool ('only when you already know the ID and want a single record'). It then names the alternative (qql_search) and specifies when to use it instead: for several records, filtered/cross-project queries, or loops.

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