Skip to main content
Glama
tacticlaunch

Linear

by tacticlaunch
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

linear_updateIssue

Idempotent

Update an existing Linear issue by providing its ID and modifying fields such as title, assignee, priority, labels, or due date.

Instructions

Update an existing issue in Linear

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID or identifier of the issue to update (e.g., ABC-123)
titleNoNew title for the issue
teamIdNoID of the team to move the issue to
cycleIdNoID of the cycle to move the issue to, or null to remove from current cycle
dueDateNoThe new due date for the issue (YYYY-MM-DD format), or null to remove
stateIdNoID of the new state for the issue
estimateNoThe estimated complexity/points for the issue
labelIdsNoIDs of the labels to set on the issue (replacing existing labels)
parentIdNoID of the parent issue, or null to convert to a regular issue
priorityNoNew priority for the issue (0 = No priority, 1 = Urgent, 2 = High, 3 = Normal, 4 = Low)
projectIdNoID of the project to move the issue to
sortOrderNoThe position of the issue in relation to other issues
assigneeIdNoID of the user to assign the issue to, or null to unassign
descriptionNoNew description for the issue (Markdown supported)
addedLabelIdsNoIDs of labels to add to the issue (without removing existing ones)
subscriberIdsNoIDs of the users to subscribe to the issue (replacing existing subscribers)
removedLabelIdsNoIDs of labels to remove from the issue
projectMilestoneIdNoID of the project milestone to assign to the issue

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
urlNo
titleNo
identifierNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.2
    • changedOutput schema / properties / url / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "identifier": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectMilestoneId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ID of the project milestone to assign to the issue",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds no new behavioral context. It does not mention that it performs a partial update (only provided fields are changed), which is important given the 18 optional parameters. The description essentially restates the tool's name without revealing side effects, error conditions, or that fields are overwritten selectively.

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?

A single, clear sentence with zero redundancy. It is appropriately minimal for a tool with a well-documented schema.

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 the 18 parameters, 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations covering idempotency, the description is not required to enumerate every field. However, it omits key nuances like partial-update semantics and any prerequisites (e.g., the issue must exist). For a complex mutation, more guidance would be helpful, but it does not reach the level of being incomplete enough to mislead.

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 coverage is 100%, with each of the 18 parameters including a description. The tool description adds nothing about parameters beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clear verb ('Update') and resource ('issue'), with the specific domain (Linear). It is distinct from most siblings, though a few specialized update tools (e.g., setIssuePriority, assignIssue) could overlap. Lacks explicit differentiation but the generic nature is understandable.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus the many specialized issue tools (e.g., assignIssue, setIssuePriority, addIssueLabel, updateIssueCustomField). No exclusions or conditions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer when the generic update is appropriate.

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/tacticlaunch/mcp-linear'

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