Skip to main content
Glama

linear_getProjects

Retrieve a list of projects from Linear to manage and track development workflows, enabling users to view project details and monitor progress.

Instructions

Get a list of projects from Linear

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the linear_getProjects tool. It wraps the call to linearService.getProjects() with error handling.
    export function handleGetProjects(linearService: LinearService) {
      return async (args: unknown) => {
        try {
          return await linearService.getProjects();
        } catch (error) {
          logError('Error getting projects', error);
          throw error;
        }
      };
    }
  • The schema definition (input/output) for the linear_getProjects tool.
    export const getProjectsToolDefinition: MCPToolDefinition = {
      name: 'linear_getProjects',
      description: 'Get a list of projects from Linear',
      input_schema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
      output_schema: {
        type: 'array',
        items: {
          type: 'object',
          properties: {
            id: { type: 'string' },
            name: { type: 'string' },
            description: { type: 'string' },
            content: { type: 'string' },
            state: { type: 'string' },
            teams: {
              type: 'array',
              items: {
                type: 'object',
                properties: {
                  id: { type: 'string' },
                  name: { type: 'string' },
                },
              },
            },
            url: { type: 'string' },
          },
        },
      },
    };
  • Registration of the linear_getProjects tool handler in the tool handlers map.
    linear_getProjects: handleGetProjects(linearService),
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action ('Get a list') without detailing aspects like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or return format. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose ('Get a list of projects from Linear'), making it highly efficient and easy to parse. Every part of the sentence earns its place by conveying essential information.

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 complexity (a read operation with no parameters) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the returned list contains (e.g., project fields, structure), how results are ordered or limited, or any behavioral traits like pagination. This leaves the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate. A baseline of 4 is assigned as it correctly avoids redundancy, though it doesn't compensate for any schema gaps (none exist).

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 action ('Get a list') and resource ('projects from Linear'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like linear_getProjectIssues (which gets issues within a project) and linear_createProject (which creates projects). However, it doesn't specify scope (e.g., all projects vs. filtered), which prevents a perfect score.

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 sibling tools like linear_getProjectIssues (for issues within a project) or linear_getInitiativeProjects (for projects in an initiative), nor does it specify prerequisites or context for usage. This leaves the agent to infer usage from tool names alone.

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