jira-alerts-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get who is on-call now

jsm_get_on_call

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the responders currently on-call for a Jira Service Management schedule, or query a past timestamp to see who was on-call when an incident started.

Instructions

Return the responders currently on-call for a JSM schedule, optionally evaluated at a past or future timestamp.

This is the tool for "who do I wake up?" and, with the 'date' argument, for "who was on-call when this incident started?" — which is often the more useful question during a post-incident review.

Args:

schedule_id (string): schedule id, or name if schedule_identifier_type='name'
schedule_identifier_type ('id' | 'name'): default 'id'
date (string, optional): ISO 8601 timestamp to evaluate at; defaults to now
flat (boolean): default true — flat list of user identifiers; false shows rotation/escalation nesting
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): default 'markdown'

Returns (json format): { "on_call": { ... }, // the API response, unmodified "participants": [ // resolved, and the field to read { "id": string, "type": string, "displayName": string, "emailAddress": string } ] }

Responders are Atlassian account ids; this tool resolves them to names for you, so there is no need to look an id up elsewhere. If the credentials lack the Jira user scope the ids are still returned, with a note saying so.

Examples:

"Who's on-call for platform right now?" -> schedule_id="platform", schedule_identifier_type="name"
"Who was on-call at 03:14 UTC yesterday?" -> date="2026-08-20T03:14:00Z"

Error handling:

An empty result means nobody is rostered at that moment — a real and important answer, not a failure.
HTTP 404 means the schedule id/name is wrong; list them with jsm_list_schedules.
HTTP 401 here while alert tools work means the token is missing read:ops-config:jira-service-management — schedules and on-call sit behind a different scope from alerts, so this is a scope gap, not a bad credential.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No	ISO 8601 timestamp to evaluate the rotation at, e.g. '2026-08-21T18:30:00Z'. Defaults to now. Use this to answer 'who was on-call when this fired?'
`flat`	No	true (default) returns a flat list of on-call user identifiers. false returns the nested structure showing which rotation or escalation each person came from.
`schedule_id`	Yes	Schedule id, or the schedule name when schedule_identifier_type='name'.
`response_format`	No	Output format. 'markdown' is compact and human-readable (default); 'json' returns every field for programmatic use.	markdown
`schedule_identifier_type`	No	Whether schedule_id holds an id or a schedule name. A name costs one extra lookup, because every schedule endpoint takes an id.	id

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`shift`	No
`on_call`	Yes
`participants`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.0Sep 12, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

First observedv1.1.1Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations that already cover the safety profile: it discloses that account ids are resolved to names, that ids still return without the Jira user scope, that an empty result is a meaningful answer rather than a failure, and that a 401 here is a scope gap distinct from alerts.

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?

Front-loaded purpose, then args, returns, examples, and error handling in clearly labeled blocks. The 'Returns' block restates what the output schema already provides, which is some redundancy, but no section is filler.

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?

With annotations, a full output schema, and 100% parameter coverage already present, the description still supplies the non-obvious pieces: the resolved 'participants' field is called out as the field to read, plus scope-gap diagnosis and empty-result semantics.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond it: the cost tradeoff of schedule_identifier_type='name' (one extra lookup) and the concrete intent of 'flat' (rotation/escalation nesting vs. flat list). The parameter list largely mirrors the schema, keeping it short of a 5.

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 ('Return the responders currently on-call for a JSM schedule') and immediately scopes it with the optional timestamp evaluation window. An agent can distinguish it from jsm_get_next_on_call and jsm_get_schedule_timeline without inspecting either 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 concrete usage framing ('who do I wake up?', 'who was on-call when this incident started?') and routes to jsm_list_schedules on a 404. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with the two closest siblings, jsm_get_next_on_call and jsm_get_schedule_timeline, so the alternative selection is only partly spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.