GitFlic MCP Server

gitflic_issue_relations_list

Read-only

Lists linked, related, and blocking issue relations for a specific project issue so you can review dependencies.

Instructions

List issue relations (linked/related/blocks).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "gitflic_issue_relations_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`raw`	No	Return the full, un-slimmed GitFlic response for THIS call (no token compression). Use when the default slim view dropped a field you need.
`fields`	No	Return only these top-level fields (plus id keys), narrowing the response further.
`project`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without the description. Beyond that, the description adds only the relation categories and says nothing about pagination, result volume, or whether unresolved/duplicate relations are included.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the key noun (issue relations) is front-loaded. The brevity is appropriate in form, though it leaves gaps that a slightly longer definition could close.

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?

For a four-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition is thin: it never explains how to identify the project or issue, what the returned relation objects look like, or whether the list is complete or paginated. Annotations cover the read-only nature, but an agent still lacks enough information to call it confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%: the raw and fields parameters are documented in the schema, but project and id are not described anywhere, and the description says nothing about their expected format (project slug vs ID, issue key vs numeric id). With a coverage gap this size, the description should compensate and does not.

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 and resource ("List issue relations") and enumerates the relation kinds (linked/related/blocks), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like gitflic_issue_comments_list or gitflic_issue_list. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gitflic_issue_view (which may also surface relations) or the comment-listing siblings. The agent must infer that this tool is for relation data only.

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

Deploy Server