HAOps MCP Server

haops_bulk_update_issues

Update multiple issues at once by changing their status, priority, or assignee to streamline batch management.

Instructions

Update multiple issues at once. Useful for batch status changes, priority updates, or reassignments.

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": {
      "projectSlug": "<projectSlug>",
      "issueIds": "<issueIds>",
      "updates": "<updates>"
    },
    "name": "haops_bulk_update_issues"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`updates`	Yes	Fields to update on all issues
`verbose`	No	If true, return the full API response instead of the compact summary (default: false)
`issueIds`	Yes	Array of issue UUIDs to update
`projectSlug`	Yes	The project slug (URL identifier)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.8.0Jul 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update multiple issues at once' without detailing error handling, atomicity, limits, or side effects. This is minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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, direct and to the point. It provides the essential information without any unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core purpose and gives examples but lacks details on response format, error handling, or constraints. It is adequate for a simple tool but has gaps for a bulk operation.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking the 'updates' object fields ('status', 'priority', 'assignedTo') to the mentioned use cases, reinforcing the schema. It does not fully compensate for any gaps but provides good contextual mapping.

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 the tool's action: 'Update multiple issues at once.' It specifies the resource (issues) and the batch nature, distinguishing it from single-issue updates like haops_update_issue. The examples of status changes, priority updates, or reassignments further clarify the use case.

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?

The description provides context by listing typical use cases ('batch status changes, priority updates, or reassignments'), helping the agent decide when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it, which is a minor gap given the presence of haops_update_issue for single updates.

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

Deploy Server