Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
omni-dev

omni-dev

by rust-works
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

jira_field_options

List allowed option values for a Jira custom field. Auto-discovers context when omitted, returns YAML output.

Instructions

List allowed option values for a JIRA custom field. If context_id is omitted, the first context for the field is auto-discovered. Returns YAML. Mirrors omni-dev atlassian jira field options.

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": {
      "field_id": "<field_id>"
    },
    "name": "jira_field_options"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
field_idYesField ID (e.g., `customfield_10001`).
context_idNoOptional context ID. When omitted, the first context is auto-discovered.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.40.0
  2. Removedv0.39.0
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.33.0
    • removedInput schema / description
      Removed value: -"Parameters for the `jira_field_options` tool."
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"FieldOptionsParams"
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It mentions auto-discovery of the first context and that returns are in YAML format, which are useful behavioral details. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe error scenarios, though 'List' implies non-mutating behavior.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and includes essential behavior (auto-discovery, output format) without waffle. The CLI mirror reference adds a small amount of context without significantly bloating the text.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, output format (YAML), and important context behavior. It lacks explicit permissions or error handling, but those are not essential for a straightforward read/list operation. Overall it is sufficiently complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; the auto-discovery behavior is already stated in the schema for context_id. No further parameter guidance is provided.

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?

The description clearly states 'List allowed option values for a JIRA custom field', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like jira_field_list (which lists fields) by focusing on option values of a single custom field.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It implies usage when one needs to know the allowed values for a custom field, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. The behavior with omitted context_id is described, which aids usage, but no exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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