Done Bear MCP

Archive Task

task_archive

Destructive

Archive a task, or several at once with tasks (max 50). They move to the Trash view, out of every working list. Confirm with the user first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`task`	No	Workspace-scoped task number, encoded as a string
`tasks`	No	Several workspace-scoped task numbers (max 50), instead of `task`. Confirm the list with the user first: one call changes every task in it.
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`workspace`	No	Workspace id, slug, or name

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`tasks`	Yes	Every task the call changed, in the order it was given
`action`	Yes

Schema Changelog

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

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / tasks

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Several workspace-scoped task numbers (max 50), instead of `task`. Confirm the list with the user first: one call changes every task in it.",
+  "items": {
+    "description": "Workspace-scoped task number, encoded as a string",
+    "pattern": "^[1-9]\\d*$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 50,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "task",
-  "context"
-]New value: +[
+  "context"
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / count

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / id

Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / number

Removed value: -{
-  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
-  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
-  "type": "integer"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / tasks

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Every task the call changed, in the order it was given",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "number": {
+        "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+        "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "title": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "id",
+      "number",
+      "title"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "action",
-  "id",
-  "number",
-  "ok"
-]New value: +[
+  "action",
+  "count",
+  "ok",
+  "tasks"
+]

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description adds useful specifics: tasks move to the Trash view, are removed from every working list, and up to 50 can be archived in one call. This enriches the annotation signal without contradicting it.

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?

Three short sentences cover the action, the batch variant, the effect, and the user-confirmation requirement. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 destructive, batch-capable tool, the description covers the action, scope, effect, and confirmation requirement. The output schema handles return-value details, so nothing critical is missing, though it could briefly note recoverability from the Trash for extra safety clarity.

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 documents all parameters at 100% coverage, including the distinction between `task` and `tasks` and the maxItems=50 constraint. The description adds minimal new parameter-level meaning beyond restating the batch limit.

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?

States a specific verb ('Archive') and resource ('task'), and clarifies both single and batch variants. The effect of moving items to the Trash view and out of all working lists clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like task_done, task_edit, and task_reopen.

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?

Gives clear context: use for archiving tasks, supports batching via `tasks`, and explicitly requires user confirmation first. It does not name sibling alternatives, but the purpose and preconditions are clear enough for an agent to know when to invoke it.

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

All Done Bear MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

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

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Task operations are clearly separated into distinct actions, and the resource tools (attachment, checklist, comment, project) are each tied to a specific object. The main ambiguity is between search and task_list, since task_list accepts a search parameter; descriptions help, but an agent could still misselect.

Naming Consistency3/5

Task tools follow a consistent task_verb pattern, but other tools mix bare nouns with an action parameter (attachment, checklist, comment, project), use reversed noun_verb (label_create), or are bare verbs/nouns (search, guide). The set is readable but not uniformly patterned.

Tool Count5/5

15 tools is within the well-scoped range for a task-management server, and each tool covers a distinct area: task lifecycle, search, context, projects, labels, attachments, checklists, comments, and guidance. No tool feels redundant or gratuitous.

Completeness4/5

The task lifecycle is well covered: create, show, list, edit, complete, reopen, and archive. Minor gaps include no permanent task deletion, no label update/delete tool, and no project removal, but these are workable and do not block core workflows.

Resources

Need Help?