Skip to main content
Glama
wkoutre

Linear MCP Server

by wkoutre

linear_subscribeToIssue

Subscribe to receive notifications about updates for a specific Linear issue by providing its ID, enabling you to stay informed on changes.

Instructions

Subscribe to issue updates

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issueIdYesID or identifier of the issue to subscribe to (e.g., ABC-123)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that validates arguments using isSubscribeToIssueArgs and calls linearService.subscribeToIssue to subscribe the current user to the specified issue.
    export function handleSubscribeToIssue(linearService: LinearService) {
      return async (args: unknown) => {
        try {
          if (!isSubscribeToIssueArgs(args)) {
            throw new Error("Invalid arguments for subscribeToIssue");
          }
          
          return await linearService.subscribeToIssue(args.issueId);
        } catch (error) {
          logError("Error subscribing to issue", error);
          throw error;
        }
      };
    }
  • MCP tool definition including name, description, input schema (requires issueId), and output schema (success boolean and message).
    export const subscribeToIssueToolDefinition: MCPToolDefinition = {
      name: "linear_subscribeToIssue",
      description: "Subscribe to issue updates",
      input_schema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          issueId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "ID or identifier of the issue to subscribe to (e.g., ABC-123)",
          },
        },
        required: ["issueId"],
      },
      output_schema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          success: { type: "boolean" },
          message: { type: "string" }
        }
      }
    };
  • Registration of the linear_subscribeToIssue handler within the registerToolHandlers function, mapping the tool name to handleSubscribeToIssue curried with LinearService.
    export function registerToolHandlers(linearService: LinearService) {
      return {
        // User tools
        linear_getViewer: handleGetViewer(linearService),
        linear_getOrganization: handleGetOrganization(linearService),
        linear_getUsers: handleGetUsers(linearService),
        linear_getLabels: handleGetLabels(linearService),
    
        // Team tools
        linear_getTeams: handleGetTeams(linearService),
        linear_getWorkflowStates: handleGetWorkflowStates(linearService),
    
        // Project tools
        linear_getProjects: handleGetProjects(linearService),
        linear_createProject: handleCreateProject(linearService),
        
        // Project Management tools
        linear_updateProject: handleUpdateProject(linearService),
        linear_addIssueToProject: handleAddIssueToProject(linearService),
        linear_getProjectIssues: handleGetProjectIssues(linearService),
        
        // Cycle Management tools
        linear_getCycles: handleGetCycles(linearService),
        linear_getActiveCycle: handleGetActiveCycle(linearService),
        linear_addIssueToCycle: handleAddIssueToCycle(linearService),
    
        // Issue tools
        linear_getIssues: handleGetIssues(linearService),
        linear_getIssueById: handleGetIssueById(linearService),
        linear_searchIssues: handleSearchIssues(linearService),
        linear_createIssue: handleCreateIssue(linearService),
        linear_updateIssue: handleUpdateIssue(linearService),
        linear_createComment: handleCreateComment(linearService),
        linear_addIssueLabel: handleAddIssueLabel(linearService),
        linear_removeIssueLabel: handleRemoveIssueLabel(linearService),
        
        // New Issue Management tools
        linear_assignIssue: handleAssignIssue(linearService),
        linear_subscribeToIssue: handleSubscribeToIssue(linearService),
        linear_convertIssueToSubtask: handleConvertIssueToSubtask(linearService),
        linear_createIssueRelation: handleCreateIssueRelation(linearService),
        linear_archiveIssue: handleArchiveIssue(linearService),
        linear_setIssuePriority: handleSetIssuePriority(linearService),
        linear_transferIssue: handleTransferIssue(linearService),
        linear_duplicateIssue: handleDuplicateIssue(linearService),
        linear_getIssueHistory: handleGetIssueHistory(linearService),
        
        // Comment Management tools
        linear_getComments: handleGetComments(linearService)
      };
    }
  • Type guard function to validate input arguments for the linear_subscribeToIssue tool, ensuring issueId is a string.
     * Type guard for linear_subscribeToIssue tool arguments
     */
    export function isSubscribeToIssueArgs(args: unknown): args is {
      issueId: string;
    } {
      return (
        typeof args === "object" &&
        args !== null &&
        "issueId" in args &&
        typeof (args as { issueId: string }).issueId === "string"
      );
    }

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only says 'Subscribe to issue updates' without disclosing that this is a mutation (creating a subscription), whether it is reversible, if the user must already be authenticated, or what happens if already subscribed. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and gets to the point. While it could include more detail, it does not contain redundant or irrelevant 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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally acceptable. However, it does not explain the result of the operation (e.g., what the tool returns or confirms successful subscription) nor any conditional behavior. It could be more complete for a production tool.

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 coverage is 100% and the description does not add any new information about the parameter beyond the schema. Since the schema already documents the parameter with an example, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 ('Subscribe') and resource ('issue updates'), making it easy to understand the tool's basic function. However, it does not differentiate from siblings, but there is no other subscribe tool in the list, so it is distinct enough to avoid confusion.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this is for subscribing the current user to notifications, nor does it indicate how to unsubscribe (e.g., via a different tool). The description lacks context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

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