Skip to main content
Glama

linear_getInitiatives

Retrieve all initiatives from Linear project management, including archived items with optional filters for managing project workflows.

Instructions

Get a list of all initiatives from Linear

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
includeArchivedNoInclude archived initiatives in the results
limitNoMaximum number of initiatives to return

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'linear_getInitiatives' tool. It validates the input using a type guard, logs the action, fetches initiatives via LinearService, and returns the list.
    export function getInitiativesHandler(linearService: LinearService) {
      return async (args: unknown) => {
        if (!isGetInitiativesInput(args)) {
          throw new Error('Invalid input for getInitiatives');
        }
    
        console.log('[getInitiatives] Fetching initiatives with options:', args);
        const initiatives = await linearService.getInitiatives(args);
        console.log(`[getInitiatives] Retrieved ${initiatives.length} initiatives`);
        return initiatives;
      };
    }
  • The MCP tool definition for 'linear_getInitiatives', including input and output schemas.
    {
      name: 'linear_getInitiatives',
      description: 'Get a list of all initiatives from Linear',
      input_schema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          includeArchived: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: 'Include archived initiatives in the results',
            default: false,
          },
          limit: {
            type: 'number',
            description: 'Maximum number of initiatives to return',
            default: 50,
          },
        },
      },
      output_schema: {
        type: 'array',
        items: {
          type: 'object',
          properties: {
            id: { type: 'string' },
            name: { type: 'string' },
            description: { type: 'string' },
            content: { type: 'string' },
            icon: { type: 'string' },
            color: { type: 'string' },
            status: { type: 'string' },
            targetDate: { type: 'string' },
            sortOrder: { type: 'number' },
            owner: {
              type: 'object',
              properties: {
                id: { type: 'string' },
                name: { type: 'string' },
                email: { type: 'string' },
              },
            },
            url: { type: 'string' },
          },
        },
      },
    },
  • Registration of the 'linear_getInitiatives' handler in the tool handlers map.
    linear_getInitiatives: getInitiativesHandler(linearService),
  • Type guard function for validating input arguments to the 'linear_getInitiatives' tool.
    export function isGetInitiativesInput(args: unknown): args is {
      includeArchived?: boolean;
      limit?: number;
    } {
      return (
        typeof args === 'object' &&
        args !== null &&
        (!('includeArchived' in args) ||
          typeof (args as { includeArchived: boolean }).includeArchived === 'boolean') &&
        (!('limit' in args) || typeof (args as { limit: number }).limit === 'number')
      );
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it 'Get[s] a list' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination (implied by limit parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. For a list-fetching tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its 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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, and there's no redundant or verbose phrasing.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (list retrieval with parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error cases, or operational constraints. For a tool with 2 parameters and no structured behavioral hints, the description should provide more context to be fully helpful.

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%, with clear documentation for includeArchived and limit parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as default behaviors or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('initiatives'), specifying it returns 'a list of all initiatives'. It distinguishes from siblings like linear_getInitiativeById (single initiative) and linear_getInitiativeProjects (related resources), though it doesn't explicitly mention these distinctions. The purpose is specific but could be more precise about scope.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose linear_getInitiatives over linear_getInitiativeById for single initiatives, linear_getIssues for issues, or linear_searchIssues for filtered queries. There's no context about prerequisites, timing, or exclusions.

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/tacticlaunch/mcp-linear'

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