Skip to main content
Glama

jira_transition

Transition a JIRA issue to a new workflow status by name or ID. List available transitions if unsure, and optionally add comment, resolution, or custom fields.

Instructions

Transition a JIRA issue to a new workflow status. Most common usage: pass the transition name in transition, e.g. transition: "In Progress". The numeric id also works, e.g. transition: "31". Names are matched case-insensitively. If unsure which transitions are valid from the issue's current status, call this tool first with list = true (or omit transition) to get the available {id, name} pairs as YAML, then call again with one of those names. For transitions whose screen requires input, pass resolution (e.g. "Fixed") and/or custom_fields (a name→value map). Optionally pass comment (JFM markdown): it rides in the transition when the screen accepts a comment (satisfying a mandatory-comment screen), otherwise it is posted separately after the transition succeeds.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesJIRA issue key (e.g., `PROJ-123`).
listNoIf true, returns the available transitions without applying one.
commentNoOptional comment (JFM markdown). Delivered in the transition itself when the transition screen accepts a comment (atomic, satisfies a mandatory-comment screen); otherwise posted as a separate comment after the transition succeeds.
resolutionNoOptional resolution to set on the transition, e.g. `"Fixed"`. Sent as `{"name": ...}`; the transition screen must accept a resolution.
transitionNoTransition name (case-insensitive) or numeric id, e.g. `"In Progress"` or `"31"`. Required unless `list` is true.
custom_fieldsNoOptional transition-screen fields, as a map of field name (or canonical id) → value. Values are coerced to the API shape the same way `jira_write`'s `fields` are (select/option → option string, arrays a string array, number/date the bare scalar). Names resolve against the transition's screen fields.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, description covers case-insensitivity, numeric ID support, list mode returning YAML, comment delivery behavior (atomic vs separate), and custom_fields coercion. Does not mention side effects like status change or notifications.

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?

Well-structured with clear purpose, usage patterns, and parameter details. Slightly lengthy but efficiently packs complex behavior into digestible sections.

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?

Covers list mode, screen input handling, comment behavior, and parameter details. Lacks explicit return value description for apply mode, but overall complete given no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds significant value: usage patterns, case-insensitivity, list mode, comment handling, resolution format, and custom_fields coercion details. Goes well beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool transitions a JIRA issue to a new status, with explicit examples of common usage. Distinguishes itself from sibling jira_transition_list by covering both listing and applying transitions.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: 'pass the transition name', 'if unsure call with list=true', and for screen inputs. Misses explicit differentiation from sibling jira_transition_list for listing only.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rust-works/omni-dev'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server