Skip to main content
Glama
joffreyBerrier

feedbug-mcp

by joffreyBerrier
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

Mark a bug as resolved

feedbug_resolve_bug
Idempotent

Mark a verified bug fix as resolved in Feedbug. Input a bug UUID or tracker ID to flip its status, hide the widget marker, and confirm the resolution without closing linked issues.

Instructions

Mark a bug as resolved in Feedbug, once its fix is verified.

Returns: a confirmation message. Use when: you have shipped and checked the fix for that exact report. Do not use when: the fix is only proposed or not yet verified — this server exposes no way to reopen a bug. Behavior: writes to Feedbug and is idempotent, since resolving an already resolved bug leaves it resolved. It flips the status of the report and hides its marker from the widget, but does NOT close the linked Linear or GitHub issue: the tracker stays the source of truth, and moving that issue back to an open state syncs the report open again through the webhook.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesBug UUID as returned by feedbug_list_bugs, or the tracker identifier such as PRE-13, matched case-insensitively. Ids belonging to another project are rejected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Feedback UUID or Linear identifier (e.g. PRE-13)"New value: +"Bug UUID as returned by feedbug_list_bugs, or the tracker identifier such as PRE-13, matched case-insensitively. Ids belonging to another project are rejected."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses key behaviors beyond the annotations: idempotency (already hinted, but explained with the 'already resolved' consequence), the fact that linked Linear/GitHub issues are NOT closed, and the webhook sync that can reopen the report. This adds substantial context about side effects and limitations.

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 well-organized into purpose, returns, usage, and behavior sections. Each sentence contributes essential information without redundancy, balancing clarity with detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the return type, side effects, idempotency, integration with external trackers, and the critical 'no reopen' caveat. It is thorough enough for correct invocation and expectations.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameter documentation, describing the id as a UUID or tracker identifier with case-insensitivity and project rejection. The description adds no extra parameter details, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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's action ('Mark a bug as resolved in Feedbug') with a specific condition ('once its fix is verified'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools by focusing on status resolution, which the read-only siblings do not do.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' sections provide clear decision guidance, including the critical warning that the server exposes no way to reopen a bug. This prevents misuse and sets it apart from feedbug_add_comment.

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/joffreyBerrier/feedbug-mcp'

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