Conecto

Change a task

tasks_update

Change a task: move it to another status, reassign, reprioritize, relabel, set a due date, edit its title or description, or link CRM records. Give only what changes; order "top" puts it first in its column. Costs $0.01 per call; nothing if it fails.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "task": "<task>"
    },
    "name": "tasks_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`task`	Yes	A task like "WEB-12", or its task_id.
`order`	No
`title`	No
`labels`	No
`status`	No	One of the project's statuses, e.g. "In progress".
`deal_id`	No
`assignee`	No	A bot's name or a person's email; "" to clear.
`due_date`	No	YYYY-MM-DD, or null.
`priority`	No
`company_id`	No
`contact_id`	No
`description`	No	Markdown.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety traits such as readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: partial-update semantics, how "top" ordering works, and billing behavior ($0.01 per call, nothing on failure).

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 definition is front-loaded with the core action and its mutable fields, followed by two short sentences covering partial-update behavior, ordering, and cost. There is no wasted prose.

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 12-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, partial-update behavior, ordering nuance, and billing. It stops short of covering permissions or full field-clearing semantics, but it is substantially complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is only 42%, but the description compensates by naming almost every mutable field: status, assignee, priority, labels, due date, title, description, CRM links, and order. It also explains the special "top" order value, though it does not fully document clearing semantics or every CRM-link parameter.

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 uses a clear verb/resource pair, "Change a task", and enumerates the specific mutations supported (status, assignee, priority, labels, due date, title, description, CRM links). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like tasks_create or crm_complete_task, but only sibling naming would be needed for a 5.

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?

It gives a clear partial-update instruction: "Give only what changes", which tells the agent this is not a full replacement. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of the explicit when/when-not routing seen in a 5.

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

All Conecto tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?