Linear MCP Server

linear_getProjectIssues

Retrieve all issues from a specific Linear project to track progress, manage tasks, and monitor project status.

Instructions

Get all issues associated with a project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes	ID of the project to get issues for
`limit`	No	Maximum number of issues to return (default: 25)

Implementation Reference

src/tools/handlers/project-handlers.ts:76-89 (handler)

Handler function that executes the tool logic: validates input args using isGetProjectIssuesArgs and calls linearService.getProjectIssues(projectId, limit).

export function handleGetProjectIssues(linearService: LinearService) {
  return async (args: unknown) => {
    try {
      if (!isGetProjectIssuesArgs(args)) {
        throw new Error("Invalid arguments for getProjectIssues");
      }
      
      return await linearService.getProjectIssues(args.projectId, args.limit);
    } catch (error) {
      logError("Error getting project issues", error);
      throw error;
    }
  };
}

src/tools/definitions/project-tools.ts:163-197 (schema)

MCP tool definition with input/output schemas for linear_getProjectIssues.

export const getProjectIssuesToolDefinition: MCPToolDefinition = {
  name: "linear_getProjectIssues",
  description: "Get all issues associated with a project",
  input_schema: {
    type: "object",
    properties: {
      projectId: {
        type: "string",
        description: "ID of the project to get issues for",
      },
      limit: {
        type: "number",
        description: "Maximum number of issues to return (default: 25)",
      },
    },
    required: ["projectId"],
  },
  output_schema: {
    type: "array",
    items: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        id: { type: "string" },
        identifier: { type: "string" },
        title: { type: "string" },
        description: { type: "string" },
        state: { type: "string" },
        priority: { type: "number" },
        team: { type: "object" },
        assignee: { type: "object" },
        url: { type: "string" }
      }
    }
  }
};

src/tools/handlers/index.ts:70-70 (registration)
Registration of the linear_getProjectIssues tool handler in the registerToolHandlers function.
```
linear_getProjectIssues: handleGetProjectIssues(linearService),
```

src/tools/type-guards.ts:453-464 (helper)

Type guard function for validating the input arguments of the linear_getProjectIssues tool.

export function isGetProjectIssuesArgs(args: unknown): args is {
  projectId: string;
  limit?: number;
} {
  return (
    typeof args === "object" &&
    args !== null &&
    "projectId" in args &&
    typeof (args as { projectId: string }).projectId === "string" &&
    (!("limit" in args) || typeof (args as { limit: number }).limit === "number")
  );
}

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedDec 30, 2025

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior (beyond the 'limit' parameter), error conditions, or what format/issues are returned. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this 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 a single, efficient sentence that states the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 read-only tool with good schema coverage but no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral context and usage guidance. The agent would need to rely heavily on the schema and possibly trial-and-error to use this effectively.

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 the schema fully documents both parameters (projectId and limit). The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, but doesn't need to since the schema is comprehensive. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

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') and resource ('issues associated with a project'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'linear_getIssues' (general issues) and 'linear_getIssueById' (specific issue), but doesn't explicitly mention this distinction in the description itself.

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 like 'linear_getIssues' or 'linear_searchIssues'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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