linear-mcp-lean

List diffs

list_diffs

Search and list Linear pull requests by title, branch, or PR number, with filters for status, owner, repo, and sort order.

Instructions

List Linear diff pull requests. Proxied to the hosted Linear MCP (no public GraphQL backing).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_diffs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`repo`	No	Filter by repo name
`limit`	No	Max results (default 50)
`owner`	No	Filter by repo owner
`query`	No	Search by title, branch, PR number, or slug
`cursor`	No	Next page cursor
`status`	No	Filter by PR status
`orderBy`	No	Sort order

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The proxy note hints at limitations but is insufficient.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant 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 7 parameters and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal. It omits details on return format, pagination behavior, or how to use filters effectively, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%, so parameters are adequately documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 lists Linear diff pull requests, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'get_diff' which retrieves a single diff, and adds implementation context about proxying.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_diff' or filtering strategies. The description implies it is for listing, but does not set expectations or exclusions.

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