Skip to main content
Glama
rust-works

omni-dev

by rust-works
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Rust
Local

jira_edit

Update existing JIRA issues by setting any editable field via display name or canonical ID, with automatic value coercion and dry-run preview.

Instructions

Set arbitrary fields on an existing JIRA issue by field display name or canonical id — labels, selects, story points, dates, rich-text custom fields (e.g. Acceptance Criteria), parent, and other editable fields. Names are resolved against the issue's edit screen and values coerced to the API shape, so pass natural values: {"Labels": ["a", "b"], "Story Points": 8, "Acceptance Criteria": "- one\n- two"}. String values for rich-text fields are JFM markdown auto-converted to ADF ("" clears the field); pass a raw ADF object ({"type": "doc", ...}) to bypass conversion. Complements jira_write (description body, assignee/reporter, raw-id fields); to change workflow status use jira_transition; for hierarchy jira_link_parent remains the canonical surface. Set dry_run: true to preview the request (method, path, body) without updating. Returns {status: ok, key, updated_fields} as YAML. Mirrors the CLI's omni-dev atlassian jira write --set-field.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesJIRA issue key (e.g., `PROJ-123`).
fieldsYesMap of field display name or canonical id (e.g. `"Labels"`, `"labels"`, `"Story Points"`, `"customfield_10088"`) to its new value. Names are resolved against the issue's edit screen (editmeta) and values are coerced to the API shape: select/option fields take the option string (becomes `{"value": ...}`), multi-selects an array of option strings, labels a plain string array, number/date fields the bare scalar, issue-link fields (e.g. Parent) an issue key string (becomes `{"key": ...}`). Rich-text fields (e.g. Acceptance Criteria) take JFM markdown (auto-converted to ADF; the empty string `""` clears the field) or a raw ADF document object (`{"type": "doc", ...}`) which is validated and forwarded as-is.
dry_runNoWhen true, resolve and return the would-be request (method, path, body) without updating the issue. Defaults to `false`.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.43.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / description
      Previous value: -"Map of field display name or canonical id (e.g. `\"Labels\"`, `\"labels\"`,\n`\"Story Points\"`, `\"customfield_19300\"`) to its new value. Names are\nresolved against the issue's edit screen (editmeta) and values are\ncoerced to the API shape: select/option fields take the option string\n(becomes `{\"value\": ...}`), multi-selects an array of option strings,\nlabels a plain string array, number/date fields the bare scalar,\nissue-link fields (e.g. Parent) an issue key string (becomes\n`{\"key\": ...}`). Rich-text fields (e.g. Acceptance Criteria) take JFM\nmarkdown (auto-converted to ADF; the empty string `\"\"` clears the\nfield) or a raw ADF document object (`{\"type\": \"doc\", ...}`) which is\nvalidated and forwarded as-is."New value: +"Map of field display name or canonical id (e.g. `\"Labels\"`, `\"labels\"`,\n`\"Story Points\"`, `\"customfield_10088\"`) to its new value. Names are\nresolved against the issue's edit screen (editmeta) and values are\ncoerced to the API shape: select/option fields take the option string\n(becomes `{\"value\": ...}`), multi-selects an array of option strings,\nlabels a plain string array, number/date fields the bare scalar,\nissue-link fields (e.g. Parent) an issue key string (becomes\n`{\"key\": ...}`). Rich-text fields (e.g. Acceptance Criteria) take JFM\nmarkdown (auto-converted to ADF; the empty string `\"\"` clears the\nfield) or a raw ADF document object (`{\"type\": \"doc\", ...}`) which is\nvalidated and forwarded as-is."
  2. Addedv0.40.0
  3. Removedv0.39.0
  4. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.33.0
    • removedInput schema / description
      Removed value: -"Parameters for the `jira_edit` tool."
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"JiraEditParams"
  5. Addedv0.32.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it explains field-name resolution against the edit screen, value coercion, JFM-to-ADF conversion, empty-string clearing, raw ADF passthrough, and the no-op dry_run behavior. It stops short of stating whether setting a field overwrites its previous value, but the overall behavior is well disclosed.

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 long but every sentence earns its place: purpose, examples, coercion rules, rich-text handling, sibling differentiation, dry-run behavior, return format, and CLI mirror. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and organized so the most important facts appear first.

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 complex mutation tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it states what the tool does, how values are transformed, what the response looks like, and which sibling tools to use instead. The only minor omission is explicit error-case behavior, but the provided detail is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents every parameter and coercion rule in detail. The description adds a helpful inline example and restates key resolution semantics, but it mostly duplicates what the input schema provides, so a baseline score 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 opens with a specific, active statement: set arbitrary fields on an existing JIRA issue, and grounds it with concrete examples such as labels, story points, rich-text custom fields, and parent. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_write, jira_transition, and jira_link_parent, making selection unambiguous.

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?

The description names the exact sibling alternatives and when each applies: jira_write for description/assignee/reporter/raw-id fields, jira_transition for workflow status, and jira_link_parent for hierarchy. It also documents dry_run as a preview mode, giving clear guidance on how to use the tool safely before updating.

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/rust-works/omni-dev'

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