jira-alerts-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List JSM alert notes

jsm_list_alert_notes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the notes and triage comments on a JSM alert's activity timeline before acting on it, so you don't repeat work others already did. Returns newest first with pagination.

Instructions

List the notes (human comments) recorded on a JSM alert's activity timeline, newest first by default.

Notes are where responders write triage context, and where integrations append re-fire and resolution updates for a deduplicated alert. Read them before acting on an alert so you don't repeat work someone already did.

Args:

alert_id (string): the full alert id (not the tinyId)
limit (number): 1-100, default 20
order ('asc' | 'desc'): default 'desc'
offset (string, optional): opaque cursor from a previous response's next_cursor
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): default 'markdown'

Returns (json format): { "notes": [{ "note": string, "owner": string, "createdAt": string, "offset": string }], "pagination": { "count": number, "has_more": boolean, "next_cursor": string } }

Examples:

"Has anyone looked at this alert yet?" -> alert_id=, limit=10
"Read the full triage history oldest first" -> order="asc", limit=100

Note: these endpoints page with opaque cursors, not numeric offsets — pass next_cursor back as 'offset'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum number of records to return (1-100, default 20).
`order`	No	Chronological order of returned entries (default 'desc', newest first).	desc
`offset`	No	Cursor from a previous response's 'next_cursor'. These endpoints use opaque cursors, not numeric offsets.
`alert_id`	Yes	Full alert id, e.g. '9b251e07-73c9-4907-9996-8cb53a6a20d0-1704440650350'. This is NOT the short tinyId shown in the JSM UI — get the full id from jsm_list_alerts first.
`response_format`	No	Output format. 'markdown' is compact and human-readable (default); 'json' returns every field for programmatic use.	markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notes`	Yes
`pagination`	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

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only, idempotent profile, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real context: newest-first default, that integrations append re-fire/resolution updates for deduplicated alerts, and that pagination uses opaque cursors rather than numeric offsets.

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-loads the purpose and the triage rationale, then organizes Args, Returns, Examples and a cursor note into scannable blocks. It is slightly long because the Args and Returns sections re-state what the schema and output schema already provide.

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?

An output schema exists and an explicit Returns block and pagination contract are supplied, so return handling is fully covered. Required vs optional params, defaults, enums and the cursor round-trip are all described, leaving nothing an agent needs to call this correctly.

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% so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond it by pairing parameters with intent-driven examples (triage check vs full history) and warning that alert_id must be the full id, not the UI tinyId. Most of the Args list does duplicate the schema descriptions, which caps it at 4.

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 ('List the notes ... recorded on a JSM alert's activity timeline') and immediately clarifies what notes are ('human comments'), which distinguishes this from the sibling log-listing tool. An agent can identify the operation 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 a clear when-to-use rule ('Read them before acting on an alert so you don't repeat work') and two natural-language examples that map intent to arguments. It does not explicitly name the nearest alternative (jsm_list_alert_logs) or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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