Local MCP

Create OmniFocus Task

create_omnifocus_task

Creates a task in OmniFocus on this Mac. Needs OmniFocus Pro (the free tier blocks automation). Without project the task goes to the inbox. project must be the exact name of an existing project: if no project has that name the call fails with an error instead of falling back to the inbox — check the name with list_omnifocus_projects first. Called without confirm it returns a preview; pass confirm=true to create. Returns the task id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	The task title.
`note`	No	Longer note/body for the task.
`confirm`	No	Must be true to create; called without it, returns a preview.
`flagged`	No	Create the task flagged.	false
`project`	No	Project to file the task under (name). Omit for the inbox.
`due_date`	No	Due date, ISO 8601 (YYYY-MM-DD or full timestamp).
`defer_date`	No	Defer/start date, ISO 8601 — the task stays hidden until then.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`name`	No
`created`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedAug 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / confirm / description

Added value: +"Must be true to create; called without it, returns a preview."

addedInput schema / properties / defer_date / description

Added value: +"Defer/start date, ISO 8601 — the task stays hidden until then."

addedInput schema / properties / due_date / description

Added value: +"Due date, ISO 8601 (YYYY-MM-DD or full timestamp)."

addedInput schema / properties / flagged / description
```
Added value: +"Create the task flagged."
```
addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"The task title."
```
addedInput schema / properties / note / description
```
Added value: +"Longer note/body for the task."
```

addedInput schema / properties / project / description

Added value: +"Project to file the task under (name). Omit for the inbox."

First observedJun 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), the description discloses a capability prerequisite (Pro tier blocks automation), a hard failure mode (no project-name fallback, error instead), and a safe preview/confirm gating behavior. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs before mutating state.

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?

Five tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and prerequisite, then the failure mode, then the confirm workflow, then the return value. No filler and every clause carries actionable information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers prerequisites, defaulting behavior, error conditions, and the confirm gate, and even notes the return value. Nothing material is left for the agent to infer.

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 100%, so a 3 is the baseline. The description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema for two parameters: `project` must match an existing project name exactly or the call errors, and `confirm` toggles preview versus creation. It does not add detail for dates or `flagged`, but the added semantics lift it above baseline.

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 (creates) and resource (task in OmniFocus) plus scope (on this Mac). An agent can distinguish this from sibling task creators like create_reminder or todoist_create_task because the target application is named explicitly.

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?

Provides clear operational context: the OmniFocus Pro prerequisite, the inbox default when `project` is omitted, and the direction to check names with list_omnifocus_projects first. It does not explicitly contrast against sibling task-creation tools, but within the OmniFocus family the routing guidance is strong.

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

All Local MCP 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.