Skip to main content
Glama

jira_get_transitions

Retrieve available workflow transitions for a Jira issue to understand possible next status changes and actions.

Instructions

Get available transitions for a Jira issue

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issueKeyYesThe Jira issue key

Implementation Reference

  • MCP server tool handler that validates input using GetTransitionsSchema and calls jiraClient.getTransitions(issueKey)
    case "jira_get_transitions": {
      const { issueKey } = GetTransitionsSchema.parse(args);
      const transitions = await jiraClient.getTransitions(issueKey);
      return {
        content: [
          { type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(transitions, null, 2) },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Core implementation in JiraClient: makes API request to /rest/api/2/issue/{issueKey}/transitions to fetch available transitions
      issueKey: string
    ): Promise<{ transitions: JiraTransition[] }> {
      return this.request<{ transitions: JiraTransition[] }>(
        `/issue/${issueKey}/transitions`
      );
    }
  • Zod schema for input validation: requires issueKey string
    const GetTransitionsSchema = z.object({
      issueKey: z.string().describe("The Jira issue key"),
    });
  • src/index.ts:347-357 (registration)
    Tool registration in MCP server's listTools response, including name, description, and inputSchema
    {
      name: "jira_get_transitions",
      description: "Get available transitions for a Jira issue",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          issueKey: { type: "string", description: "The Jira issue key" },
        },
        required: ["issueKey"],
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation (implied by 'Get' but not explicit), what permissions are needed, rate limits, or what the output format looks like (e.g., list of transition IDs/names). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized for a simple tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's moderate complexity (retrieving workflow data) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'transitions' are in Jira context, what the return values include, or any behavioral traits. For a tool with no structured support, more descriptive context is needed.

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?

The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. Since schema description coverage is 100% (the 'issueKey' parameter is fully described in the schema), the baseline score is 3. The description doesn't compensate with additional context like format examples or constraints.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'available transitions for a Jira issue', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'jira_get_issue' or 'jira_get_statuses' which also retrieve issue-related data, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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. For example, it doesn't mention that this is specifically for workflow transitions (as opposed to general issue data from 'jira_get_issue') or when to use 'jira_transition_issue' to actually perform a transition. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/yogeshhrathod/JiraMCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server