Skip to main content
Glama
rrvrs

jira-alerts-mcp

List this server's toolsets

jsm_list_capabilities
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all available Jira Service Management toolsets, show which are enabled, and identify how to load missing ones via JSM_TOOLSETS before reporting a capability is unsupported.

Instructions

Report every toolset this server knows about, whether it is currently loaded, and how to load one that is not.

Call this before telling the user something is impossible. This server carries far more of the Jira Service Management Operations API than any one install registers — the operator chooses which families load, so an absent tool usually means "not enabled here", not "not supported". This tool tells you which of the two it is, and names the exact environment variable to change.

It takes no arguments, makes no API call, and needs no credentials, so it also answers when the token is missing or wrong.

Args: none beyond response_format.

  • response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): default "markdown"

Returns (json format): { "requested": string[], // the names this process was configured with "read_only": boolean, "tool_count": number, // tools actually registered "toolsets": [ { "name": string, "enabled": boolean, // whether any of its tools are registered "selected": boolean, // whether the selection asked for it; false enabled with true // selected means read-only mode withheld the tools "summary": string, "scopes": string[], // OAuth scopes this family needs "tool_count": number, "tools": string[], "unverified": string // present only when the family was never seen to work } ] }

A toolset carrying unverified ships but no profile loads it, 'all' included — it has to be named on its own, as JSM_TOOLSETS=all,. The string says what blocked it: a JSM plan that excludes the feature, or a permission no credential on the test site held. Enabling it is allowed and may well work on a different site, but say what the limit was before suggesting it.

Examples:

  • User asks for something no loaded tool covers -> call this, then tell them which toolset covers it and that JSM_TOOLSETS needs to include it.

  • Tool exists but its toolset is unverified -> say so plainly, quote the reason, and let the user decide whether their plan differs.

  • "What can you do here?" -> call this rather than guessing from your tool list.

Note: changing JSM_TOOLSETS requires restarting the server. You cannot enable a toolset from inside a conversation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
response_formatNoOutput format. 'markdown' is compact (default); 'json' returns every field.markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolsetsYes
read_onlyYes
requestedYes
tool_countYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.0
    • 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"
  2. Addedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/destructive, but the description adds substantial non-annotation context: it makes no API call, needs no credentials, works even when the token is missing or wrong, and discloses the unverified toolset caveat with the exact enabling syntax and the reason it was blocked (plan exclusion or unheld permission). This is rich, clearly-earned behavioral disclosure.

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 with purpose and the 'call before declaring impossible' guidance, followed by a well-structured Returns block and concrete examples. It is on the long side, and some sentences (the parenthetical about 'selected') could be tightened, but nearly every sentence earns its place.

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, yet the description still explains the semantics an agent needs to interpret it correctly: what 'selected' vs 'enabled' means, what 'unverified' signals, and why. Combined with the usage examples and the restart caveat, nothing an agent needs to select or interpret this tool is missing.

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 the single response_format parameter is fully documented in both schema and description (with the markdown/json tradeoff spelled out: 'markdown' is compact, 'json' returns every field). The baseline for full coverage is 3; the added nuance about what 'json' returns nudges it up.

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 ('report every toolset this server knows about, whether it is currently loaded, and how to load one that is not') and clearly distinguishes itself from its siblings, which are all alert/schedule operations. An agent can immediately tell this is a meta/discovery tool, not an API operation.

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 prescribes when to call it: 'Call this before telling the user something is impossible' and 'call this rather than guessing from your tool list.' It also names the failure mode it resolves (absent tool = not enabled vs. not supported) and the exact remedy (JSM_TOOLSETS env var), plus the caveat that restart is required.

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