Skip to main content
Glama

Done Bear

by com.donebear

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
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskNoWorkspace-scoped task number, encoded as a string
tasksNoSeveral workspace-scoped task numbers (max 50), instead of `task`. Confirm the list with the user first: one call changes every task in it.
contextYesExplain 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."
workspaceNoWorkspace id, slug, or name

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
countYes
tasksYesEvery task the call changed, in the order it was given
actionYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • 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"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the description's added value is explaining the concrete effect: tasks are moved to the Trash view and removed from all working lists. This goes beyond the annotation and sets accurate expectations about the operation's impact.

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 deliver the core action, batch behavior, consequence, and user-confirmation requirement without redundancy or filler. The most important safety instruction is positioned at the end but remains prominent.

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?

The description is complete for a destructive batch operation: it states what happens, the max batch size, and the confirmation requirement. The output schema and annotations cover the remaining details, though the description could have explicitly tied the task selector parameters to the archived task(s).

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%, so parameter explanations are already fully present. The description reinforces `tasks` and the 50-item cap, but it does not add meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Archive a task, or several at once with `tasks`'. It also defines the outcome clearly ('move to the Trash view, out of every working list'), which distinguishes it from siblings like task_done or 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?

The description gives clear usage context, including the batch limit and a critical user-confirmation requirement: 'Confirm with the user first.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the guidance is sufficient for correct invocation.

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

All Done Bear toolsInspect
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

Most tools map to clearly distinct resources and actions: task lifecycle verbs, sub-resource tools (attachment, checklist, comment), and search are easy to tell apart. The only mild overlaps are search vs task_list's built-in search parameter and get_context vs task_list for recent tasks, but the descriptions give enough guidance to avoid frequent misselection.

Naming Consistency3/5

Task operations consistently follow a task_verb pattern, but other tools use bare resource nouns (attachment, checklist, comment, project), plus get_context, guide, label_create, and search break the pattern further. The names are readable, but the convention is mixed rather than uniform.

Tool Count5/5

At 15 tools, the set sits at the upper end of the well-scoped range but each tool has a distinct responsibility: task lifecycle, search, sub-resources, project/label management, context, and guidance. None feel redundant, and the count matches the breadth of the task-management domain.

Completeness3/5

Core task workflows are well covered: create, read, update, complete, reopen, archive, list, and search, plus comments, checklists, and attachments. Notable gaps remain: labels only support creation, archived tasks have no explicit restore path, and projects cannot be deleted or archived.

Resources