Linear MCP
Shares rank 11 of 21 MCP servers by recommenders
Recommended for needing no local setup and well-designed tools that work from the terminal; critics most often call it inefficient.
Recommended for needing no local setup and well-designed tools that work from the terminal; critics most often call it inefficient.
12 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 8
- criticize it
- 4
- approval share
- 67%
Recommended in 4 of 13 months
- November 2025: not recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: not recommended
- March 2026: recommended
- April 2026: recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: not recommended
- September 2026: recommended
- October 2026: not recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 8 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, not met.
- 2 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, met.
- Recommended in 4 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Well-designed tool APIs
“the tool APIs that the MCP server exposes are well designed”
Comment from 4 Sep 2026 in “Ask HN: Who is using MCP in production?” “Linear's MCP is also very clean and well designed”
Comment from 3 Sep 2026 in “Ask HN: Who is using MCP in production?” Complete with no extra setup
“having everything happen (discovery, usage, updates to the API, etc) without having to install or configure anything else locally is a big deal”
Comment from 21 Sep 2026 in “MCP was always a bad idea?” “That's really all you need.”
Comment from 14 Apr 2026 in “Gas Town: From Clown Show to v1.0”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Described as inefficient
“It is just too inefficient in that regard.”
Comment from 21 Sep 2026 in “MCP was always a bad idea?” “Linear's MCP is just (very?) inefficient.”
Comment from 21 Sep 2026 in “MCP was always a bad idea?”
Other MCP servers people recommend
The four most recommended other MCP servers, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Playwright MCP | 40 | 22 | 65% | 11 | — | — |
| Context7 | 40 | 7 | 85% | 10 | — | Approved |
| Chrome DevTools MCP | 36 | 22 | 62% | 9 | — | — |
| Serena MCP | 18 | 3 | 86% | 9 | — | Approved |
| Linear MCPThis page | 8 | 4 | 67% | 4 | — | — |
What people said
11 of the 13 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“Linear's MCP is just (very?) inefficient.”
“It is just too inefficient in that regard.”
“having everything happen (discovery, usage, updates to the API, etc) without having to install or configure anything else locally is a big deal”
“the tool APIs that the MCP server exposes are well designed”
“That's what we used in our product - a bug report tool that uses Linear MCP to create a task. Works great.”
“Linear's MCP is also very clean and well designed”
“Sounds like the Liner MCP could use with some of that.”
“My agents do run into composability problems here all the time”
“The linear MCP is amazing to work with as it lets me keep all my workflows in the terminal.”
“That's really all you need.”
“They just casually let the MCP do anything the user can and access everything.”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.