Skip to main content
Glama
testdino-hq

TestDino MCP

by testdino-hq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get External Issue

get_external_issue
Read-only

Fetches details for Jira, Linear, or Asana issues already linked to a TestDino project using provider IDs or keys, so agents can inspect external task context.

Instructions

Fetch external issue/task details by provider IDs or keys previously linked to TestDino, such as Jira keys TD-17 or Linear issue identifiers.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNoProvider-specific target/context values. For Jira, pass { defaultApp } to read from a specific Atlassian site/resource.
issueIdsYesExternal issue IDs or keys (at most 20).
providerYesProvider to read issues from. monday.com and GitHub have no issue read route.
projectIdYesTestDino project ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.2.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / issueIds / description
      Previous value: -"External issue IDs or keys."New value: +"External issue IDs or keys (at most 20)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / issueIds / maxItems
      Added value: +20
  2. Changed8 schema fields changedv2.2.0
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / issueIds / description
      Previous value: -"External issue IDs or keys (Required). Array of one or more IDs previously linked to TestDino (e.g. Jira keys like 'TD-17' or Linear identifiers)."New value: +"External issue IDs or keys."
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Project ID (Required). The TestDino project identifier."New value: +"TestDino project ID"
    • changedInput schema / properties / provider / description
      Previous value: -"Integration provider the issue lives in (Required). Use the same provider passed to create_external_issue."New value: +"Provider to read issues from. monday.com and GitHub have no issue read route."
    • changedInput schema / properties / provider / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "jira",
-  "linear",
-  "asana",
-  "monday",
-  "github"
-]New value: +[
+  "jira",
+  "linear",
+  "asana"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / target / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
    • changedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Previous value: -"Provider-specific read context (optional). For Jira, pass { defaultApp } to read from a specific Atlassian site/resource."New value: +"Provider-specific target/context values. For Jira, pass { defaultApp } to read from a specific Atlassian site/resource."
  3. Addedv2.0.2

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safe-read profile, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It adds the 'previously linked' prerequisite, which is genuine value, but says nothing about the return payload, partial-failure behavior across multiple IDs, or per-provider quirks (e.g., Jira site selection via target).

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?

One tight sentence with the action and resource front-loaded and no filler. The trailing example clause ('Jira keys TD-17 or Linear issue identifiers') borders on redundant with 'provider IDs or keys', but it earns its place as illustration.

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?

For a 4-param tool with a nested object and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the lookup contract but not what comes back (issue detail shape), how batch results are ordered or how failures surface, and it never touches the Jira `target`/Atlassian site dimension, which is a real usage decision for callers.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all four parameters including the enum, the 20-item cap, and the Jira `target` object. The description adds key-format examples (Jira 'TD-17', Linear identifiers) that go slightly beyond the schema, but it omits `target`, `projectId`, and the batching limit entirely. Baseline 3.

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 states a specific verb (fetch) and resource (external issue/task details) plus the lookup mechanism (provider IDs or keys previously linked to TestDino). The 'fetch' vs. the sibling 'create_external_issue' is implicitly distinguishable, but the description never names the sibling to sharpen the boundary.

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?

'Previously linked to TestDino' implies the prerequisite that the issue must already be linked, which is useful when-to-use context. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of the alternative create_external_issue for unlinked issues, and no handling guidance for unsupported providers.

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