How do I use jira-pm-mcp?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@jira-pm-mcp get sprint health for PROJ Sprint 5" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

jira-pm-mcp

by panitw

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

jira-pm-mcp

An MCP server that wraps the JIRA Cloud REST API for AI-driven agile project management. Designed to be run as a daily batch by an AI agent (e.g. via OpenClaw) to monitor sprint health, sync labels, flag risks, and write audit receipts.

Requirements

Node.js 20+
JIRA Cloud instance
API token with edit-issues and add-comments permissions on the target projects

Related MCP server: Jira MCP Integration

Setup

npm install
npm run build

Environment variables

Variable	Required	Description
`JIRA_BASE_URL`	yes	Base URL of your JIRA instance (e.g. `https://yourcompany.atlassian.net`)
`JIRA_EMAIL`	yes	Email address tied to the API token
`JIRA_API_TOKEN`	yes	JIRA Cloud API token
`PORT`	no	When set, starts an HTTP/SSE server on this port instead of stdio

Transport modes

The server supports two transport modes selected at startup.

stdio (default)

The server process is spawned and managed by the MCP client. Env vars are passed through the client config. Best for local single-user setups.

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "jira-pm": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/path/to/jira-pm-mcp/dist/index.js"],
      "env": {
        "JIRA_BASE_URL": "https://yourcompany.atlassian.net",
        "JIRA_EMAIL": "you@company.com",
        "JIRA_API_TOKEN": "your-token"
      }
    }
  }
}

HTTP/SSE

The server runs as a persistent HTTP process. The MCP client connects to it via SSE. Best for running the server as a system service or Docker container shared across multiple clients.

Start the server:

export JIRA_BASE_URL=https://yourcompany.atlassian.net
export JIRA_EMAIL=you@company.com
export JIRA_API_TOKEN=your-token
export PORT=3000
node dist/index.js

Claude Desktop config (claude_desktop_config.json):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "jira-pm": {
      "url": "http://localhost:3000/sse"
    }
  }
}

Endpoints:

Endpoint	Method	Description
`/sse`	GET	SSE stream — MCP client connects here
`/message?sessionId=<id>`	POST	MCP message delivery (used internally by client)
`/health`	GET	Liveness probe — returns `{"status":"ok","sessions":<n>}`

Tools

`setup_project`

Configure a project for PM Agent monitoring. Must be run before any other tools. Validates connectivity and write permissions, then stores configuration as a YAML comment on the Root Epic and registers the project locally.

Parameter	Type	Required	Description
`project_key`	string	yes	JIRA project key (e.g. `PROJ`)
`root_epic_key`	string	yes	Key of the root epic that parents all cross-project tasks (e.g. `PROJ-1`)
`board_id`	number	no	JIRA board ID (optional, for validation only)
`epic_link_field`	string	no	JQL field for child tasks. `"Epic Link"` (default, classic projects) or `"parent"` (next-gen/team-managed)
`active_statuses`	string[]	no	Status names that count as in-progress. Default: `In Progress, In Review, Code Review, In Testing`
`committed_date`	string	no	Project delivery deadline `YYYY-MM-DD`. Enables delivery risk and velocity tracking.
`story_points_field`	string	no	Custom field key for story points. Default: `customfield_10016`

Returns: A checklist of validation results (root_epic, fix_versions, write_permissions, config_written) plus the config comment ID.

`list_projects`

List all projects registered with the PM Agent, with their configuration summary.

No parameters.

Returns: Array of projects with project_key, root_epic_key, committed_date, epic_link_field, active_statuses, and config_available.

`list_fix_versions`

List all fixVersions (sprints) for a project. Identifies the currently active sprint and how far through it we are.

Parameter	Type	Required	Description
`project_key`	string	yes	JIRA project key

Returns: Array of versions with name, label_equivalent (spaces replaced with hyphens), start_date, release_date, is_active, is_released, and elapsed_pct.

`get_sprint_health`

Read-only full sprint health snapshot. Builds the full dependency graph — stories → blocking tasks → dates and status — without making any changes to JIRA. Safe to call at any time.

Parameter	Type	Required	Description
`project_key`	string	yes	JIRA project key
`fix_version`	string	yes	fixVersion name identifying the sprint

Returns:

Sprint metadata (dates, elapsed_pct, committed_date)
Summary counts (total_stories, stories_with_no_tasks, stories_past_sprint_end, tasks_missing_dates, orphaned_tasks)
Per-story breakdown: effective_completion_date (max end date across blocking tasks), past_sprint_end, past_committed_date, has_date_gap, and the full list of blocking tasks with their dates, assignees, and current pm-* labels
orphaned_tasks: tasks under the root epic that don't block any story in this sprint

`run_sprint_audit`

Run the daily PM audit for a sprint. This is the main write tool — it applies all label and date changes to JIRA and writes an audit receipt to the Root Epic.

Parameter	Type	Required	Description
`project_key`	string	yes	JIRA project key
`fix_version`	string	yes	fixVersion name identifying the sprint
`dry_run`	boolean	no	If `true`, compute all changes but do not write to JIRA (default: `false`)

What it does (in order):

Sync sprint labels — adds the sprint label (fixVersion with spaces → hyphens) to all blocking tasks in the sprint
Compute task flags — evaluates each blocking task and applies pm-flag-* labels:
- Date slip: end date past sprint boundary (pm-flag-critical-date-slip, pm-flag-warn-date-approaching)
- Commitment risk: end date past committed_date (pm-flag-task-beyond-commitment)
- Not started: task in Backlog/Todo at mid-sprint (pm-flag-critical-not-started, pm-flag-warn-not-started)
- Stalled: no status change for more than stalled_threshold_days (pm-flag-warn-stalled)
Compute story flags — evaluates each story:
- Stories whose effective_completion_date slips past the sprint end or committed_date (pm-flag-story-at-risk, pm-flag-story-beyond-commitment)
- Stories with missing blocking tasks (pm-flag-missing-tasks)
- Stories with date gaps between blocking tasks (pm-flag-date-gap)
- Stories recommended for deferral (pm-flag-recommend-defer)
Update story due dates — sets each story's duedate to its effective_completion_date (max end date of blocking tasks)
Velocity calculation — if committed_date is set, samples up to 5 past released sprints, computes average velocity, and projects expected completion date
Write audit receipt — posts a YAML receipt comment to the Root Epic

Tasks with pm-acknowledged are skipped entirely (human override).

Returns: Summary of changes made, label_changes, story_date_changes, tasks_needing_dates, defer_recommendations, velocity result, and receipt_comment_id.

`rollback_audit`

Reverse the label and story date changes made by a previous run_sprint_audit. Reads the audit receipt from the Root Epic and applies the inverse diff. Never removes pm-acknowledged labels.

Parameter	Type	Required	Description
`project_key`	string	yes	JIRA project key
`audit_timestamp`	string	no	Timestamp from the receipt to roll back (e.g. `2026-02-22T06-00-00-000Z`). Defaults to the most recent audit.

Returns: rolled_back_audit, changes_reversed, errors, and rollback_receipt_comment_id.

`search_issues`

Escape hatch for ad-hoc JQL queries. Returns a page of matching issues with key, summary, status, assignee, labels, fixVersions, and due date. Use the high-level tools (get_sprint_health, run_sprint_audit) for routine PM operations.

Parameter	Type	Required	Description
`jql`	string	yes	JQL query string
`start_at`	number	no	Pagination offset (default: `0`)
`max_results`	number	no	Results per page, max 100 (default: `50`)
`fields`	string[]	no	Specific field keys to return

Returns: total, start_at, max_results, returned, and issues array.

pm-* label taxonomy

The agent owns the full pm-* label namespace. All managed labels are cleared and recomputed on each audit run. The one exception is pm-acknowledged — set by a human to suppress all agent flags on that issue; the agent never removes it.

Label	Applied to	Meaning
`pm-acknowledged`	Task or Story	Human override — agent skips this issue entirely
`pm-flag-critical-date-slip`	Task	End date is past the sprint boundary
`pm-flag-warn-date-approaching`	Task	End date is within the last 20% of the sprint
`pm-flag-task-beyond-commitment`	Task	End date is past `committed_date`
`pm-flag-critical-not-started`	Task	Still in Backlog/Todo past the 50% sprint mark
`pm-flag-warn-not-started`	Task	Still in Backlog/Todo past the 25% sprint mark
`pm-flag-warn-stalled`	Task	No status change for more than `stalled_threshold_days`
`pm-flag-shared-task`	Task	Task blocks stories in multiple projects
`pm-flag-story-at-risk`	Story	`effective_completion_date` is past sprint end
`pm-flag-story-beyond-commitment`	Story	`effective_completion_date` is past `committed_date`
`pm-flag-delivery-at-risk`	Story	Velocity projection shows project won't meet `committed_date`
`pm-flag-missing-tasks`	Story	Story has no blocking tasks linked
`pm-flag-date-gap`	Story	Gap exists between consecutive blocking task date windows
`pm-flag-recommend-defer`	Story	Story is unlikely to complete in time; defer recommended

Sprint labels (e.g. SIT-27-02-2026) are also applied to blocking tasks by the audit — these are derived from fixVersion names with spaces replaced by hyphens.

Authority model

Action	Who
Set task start/end dates	Human only
Set story due date	PM Agent (auto-set to `effective_completion_date`)
Add/remove `pm-flag-*` labels	PM Agent
Add sprint label to tasks	PM Agent
Add `pm-acknowledged`	Human only
Remove `pm-acknowledged`	Human only
Create fixVersions	Human only
Sprint planning (assign stories to fixVersion)	Human only

Architecture

src/
  server.ts           — MCP server entry point, registers all tools
  tools/              — One file per MCP tool
  jira/               — JIRA REST API client wrappers (client, search, issues, versions, comments)
  audit/              — Core audit logic (graph, flags, velocity, receipt)
  config/             — Project config schema, JIRA-backed storage, local registry
  utils/              — Labels, dates, JQL builder

Configuration is stored as a YAML comment on the Root Epic in JIRA (prefixed with ## pm-agent-config), making it portable and version-controlled alongside the project. A local .jira-pm-registry.json maps project_key → root_epic_key to bootstrap config reads without a prior JIRA call.

Available Tools

4 tools

run_sprint_auditA

Run the daily PM audit for a sprint. Syncs sprint labels on blocking tasks, computes and applies pm-* risk flags, auto-updates story due dates to effective_completion_date, calculates velocity if committed_date is configured, and writes an audit receipt to the Root Epic. Supports dry_run mode.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dry_run`	No	If true, compute all changes but do not write to JIRA
`fix_version`	Yes	fixVersion name identifying the sprint
`project_key`	Yes	JIRA project key

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It details the entire workflow: syncing labels, computing risk flags, updating due dates, calculating velocity if certain conditions are met, writing a receipt, and supporting a dry_run mode. This is comprehensive, though it could mention destructiveness or permissions.

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 two short sentences: the first defines the tool's core purpose, and the second enumerates specific actions. Every phrase contributes essential information, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

While the description covers the actions, it lacks details about return values (no output schema) and error conditions. Prerequisites like project setup are not mentioned, but the sibling tools list includes setup_project, hinting at dependencies. The description is adequate for a daily audit tool but leaves some gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

All three parameters have full schema descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the effect of dry_run ('compute but do not write') and contextualizing fix_version as the sprint identifier. This enriches understanding beyond the schema.

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 runs a daily PM audit for a sprint, listing specific actions like syncing labels, computing risk flags, updating due dates, calculating velocity, and writing an audit receipt. This specificity distinguishes it from sibling tools such as sync_sprint_tasks, which likely focus on task-level operations.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies a daily usage context but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sync_sprint_tasks or search_issues. No explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, though the 'daily PM audit' framing offers some guidance.

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

search_issuesA

Escape hatch for ad-hoc JQL queries. Returns a page of matching issues with key, summary, status, assignee, labels, and fixVersions. Use high-level tools (get_sprint_health, run_sprint_audit) for routine PM operations.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`jql`	Yes	JQL query string
`fields`	No	Specific field keys to return. Defaults to common fields.
`start_at`	No	Pagination offset
`max_results`	No	Results per page (max 100)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes return behavior (a page of matching issues with specific fields) but doesn't disclose pagination details, side effects, or auth requirements beyond what schema implies.

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?

Two sentences only: first states purpose and output, second gives usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and usage context. It lacks examples or JQL syntax guidance, but is sufficient for ad-hoc queries.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 it's an 'Escape hatch for ad-hoc JQL queries,' specifying the verb (search) and resource (issues). It lists return fields and distinguishes from high-level tools like get_sprint_health and run_sprint_audit.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (ad-hoc JQL queries) and when not (use high-level tools for routine PM operations). Names two alternatives, providing clear context for selection.

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

setup_projectA

Configure a project for PM Agent monitoring. Validates the root epic, board, fixVersions, and write permissions. Stores config as a YAML comment on the Root Epic. Must be run before any audit tools.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`board_id`	No	JIRA board ID (optional)
`project_key`	Yes	JIRA project key (e.g. PROJ)
`root_epic_key`	Yes	Key of the root epic that parents all cross-project tasks (e.g. PROJ-1)
`committed_date`	No	Optional project delivery deadline (YYYY-MM-DD). Enables delivery risk and velocity checks.
`active_statuses`	No	Status names that mean work is actively in progress. Defaults to: In Progress, In Review, Code Review, In Testing.
`epic_link_field`	No	JQL field for finding child tasks. setup_project will auto-detect the working field by probing JIRA — candidates tried in order: provided value → parentEpic → parent.	Epic Link
`story_points_field`	No	JIRA custom field key for story points.	customfield_10016

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses validation actions and config storage as a YAML comment. However, it does not describe error handling, side effects, or return behavior, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise—two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second details actions and requirements. No unnecessary information; front-loaded and efficient.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core behavior but omits return values and error scenarios. For a configuration tool, understanding success/failure conditions is important, so completeness is adequate but not outstanding.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that parameters are validated and config is stored as a YAML comment, which goes beyond schema descriptions. This enhances understanding of how parameters are used.

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 purpose: 'Configure a project for PM Agent monitoring.' It details specific actions (validates root epic, board, fixVersions, write permissions) and distinguishes from sibling tools like run_sprint_audit by noting it is a setup prerequisite.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly states 'Must be run before any audit tools,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. While it does not mention when-not-to-use or alternatives, the prerequisite nature is unambiguous.

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

sync_sprint_tasksA

Sync blocking task priorities and sprint labels to match user stories in a sprint. For each story in the sprint, finds all blocking Tasks and: (1) upgrades task priority if lower than the story priority, (2) adds the sprint label if missing. Excludes tasks with "SIT" or "UAT" in their summary. Supports resumable execution via a temp state file.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sprint_name`	Yes	fixVersion name identifying the sprint (e.g. "SIT-20/03/2026")
`project_keys`	Yes	List of JIRA project keys to search for stories

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behaviors: it modifies priorities (upgrades if lower), adds sprint labels, excludes tasks with 'SIT' or 'UAT', and supports resumable execution via a temp state file. This provides good transparency, though it could mention potential side effects or error handling.

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 three sentences long, each earning its place: purpose, action details, exclusion and resumability. It is front-loaded with the primary goal and efficient.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (multi-step sync, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main behaviors, exclusions, and resumable execution. It is mostly complete, though missing details on error handling or idempotency.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage (sprint_name as fixVersion name, project_keys as JIRA project keys). The description adds overall context but does not provide additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so baseline 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 purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Sync blocking task priorities and sprint labels to match user stories in a sprint.' It details the actions (upgrade priority, add label) and exclusions, making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explains the context (syncing tasks within a sprint) and what the tool does step-by-step, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_sprint_audit or search_issues. The usage is implied but not contrasted with siblings.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

4 tool updatesv1.0.0Jul 25, 2026
- First observedrun_sprint_audit
- First observedsearch_issues
- First observedsetup_project
- First observedsync_sprint_tasks

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: setup_project for configuration, run_sprint_audit for comprehensive sprint audit, sync_sprint_tasks for blocking task synchronization, and search_issues as an ad-hoc JQL escape hatch. No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (setup_project, run_sprint_audit, sync_sprint_tasks, search_issues), making the naming predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose as a PM monitoring assistant. Each tool serves a necessary function (setup, audit, sync, search), and the count fits comfortably within the typical 3-15 range.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core PM workflow: configuration, audit, task synchronization, and ad-hoc queries. However, it references a 'get_sprint_health' tool that is not provided, and lacks tools for direct issue creation or manual updates, leaving minor gaps.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

mcp COAuth
ai.taskive
AI-native project management + agent memory: tasks, sprints, risk, burnout, knowledge search.
Project Management Knowledge & Memory
2
Kelvia
io.github.gonnagetapower
Task manager your agent can fully operate: boards, tasks, sprints, roles, worklogs, day planner.
Project Management Workplace & Productivity
11
OrbitOAuth
io.github.Noveum
Task management for people and AI agents, with scoped OAuth access to issues, projects, and docs.
130
SprintFlint
io.github.neoflintai
Opinionated sprint tracker. Read/update tickets, sprints, velocity from Claude/Cursor/Zed.
Project Management Developer Tools
2

Related MCP Servers

mcp-jira-server
Project Management Developer Tools
1broseidon
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Provides integration with Jira's REST API, allowing AI assistants to manage Jira issues programmatically.
Updated a year ago (2025-06-21 13:37 UTC)
64
11
MIT
Jira MCP Integration
Project Management Developer Tools
Koveh
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Enables AI agents to interact with Jira Cloud through the REST API, supporting project management, issue operations (create, read, update, delete), JQL search, task assignments, and status transitions.
Updated 9 months ago (2025-11-28 15:23 UTC)
-
JIRA MCP Server
Project Management Developer Tools CI/CD & DevOps
JasserAmri
A
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
Provides comprehensive access to Jira Cloud and Data Center instances for managing issues, epics, and attachments with AI-optimized data cleaning. It supports relationship tracking and dual transport modes via STDIO and Streamable HTTP.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-07-15 10:24 UTC)
640
MIT
Jira MCP Server
Project Management Developer Tools
tristandistretti
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Exposes Jira API calls as tools for use with AI models like Claude, enabling project listing, board management, issue creation/deletion/status updates, and more.
Updated 7 months ago (2026-02-02 17:06 UTC)
98
Apache 2.0

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

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/panitw/jira-mcp-server'

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