mcp-server

create_project

Create a project in the connected LoopGantt ACCOUNT (requires a LoopGantt API key). For a keyless chart use create_gantt instead. Pass workflow: "agent_board" for a board a team of agents works on - stages todo, in_progress, blocked, waiting_approval, done (done is the finished stage).

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "tasks": "<tasks>"
    },
    "name": "create_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`tasks`	Yes
`workflow`	No	Board columns preset. agent_board = todo, in_progress, blocked, waiting_approval, done. Omit for the default stages (not_started, in_progress, on_hold, completed).
`startDate`	No	YYYY-MM-DD
`description`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does add valuable non-schema facts such as the API-key/auth prerequisite and the effect of the workflow preset on board stages. It is silent on whether the call is additive or destructive, permission requirements, what is returned, and whether task dependencies are validated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences with the auth requirement and the alternative tool front-loaded, which is the right ordering. The listing of stages repeats the workflow enum already in the schema, so a little of the text is redundant with structured data.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema and no annotations means the description should carry more of the contract for a creation tool with a nested required task array. It covers auth, the sibling alternative, and one parameter preset, but omits return shape, task/dependency expectations, and where the new project becomes visible (e.g. list_projects).

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 coverage is 40%, and the description only elaborates on workflow (partially duplicating the schema's own enum description) while leaving name, tasks, dependencies, and description unexplained. The nested task array and dependency index semantics remain undocumented, so it does not fully compensate for the coverage gap.

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 and resource ("Create a project") plus the target scope (connected LoopGantt ACCOUNT) in the first clause. It immediately contrasts itself with the sibling create_gantt, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit routing rule: use this tool when you have a LoopGantt API key, and use create_gantt instead for a keyless chart. It also says when to pass the workflow preset (agent teams) versus omitting it, which is real when-to-use guidance.

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

All mcp-server 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?