Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Product Manager MCP

Product Manager MCP

by r28ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

linear_customer_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single customer from Linear by UUID to access account details for product-management workflows.

Instructions

Get one customer by its UUID.

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": {
      "variables": "<variables>"
    },
    "name": "linear_customer_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
variablesYesWhich customer to fetch.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond the annotations: no note on behavior for a missing/unknown UUID, no error semantics, no indication of what is returned.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler and no redundancy. It is efficient, though so terse that brevity shades into under-specification rather than being exemplary.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool this is minimally adequate, but there is no output schema, so the description carries some burden for indicating what is returned and what happens on a bad UUID, and it does neither.

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% and the single `id` parameter is already documented as "The customer's UUID." The description restates the UUID lookup but adds no format, source, or validation detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get one customer") plus the lookup key (UUID), which cleanly separates it from linear_customers_list, linear_customer_create, and linear_customer_update. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so differentiation relies on the reader inferring it from the singular noun and verb.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternative (linear_customers_list) for discovery-style lookups. The only implied condition is that you already have a UUID, which is never stated.

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