Skip to main content
Glama

List tasks

list_tasks
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all tasks across every project in the active workspace. Returns the API's JSON array, in each project's outline order. To find a task by name, search is far cheaper on a large workspace. A Guest sees only the projects granted to them, without assignees. Pass milestonesOnly=true for the workspace's schedule gates alone — the quickest answer to "what's coming up" on a large workspace, since it filters server-side. A milestone marks a dated gate rather than a span of work (launch date, sign-off, go/no-go). The server holds it to one date — endDate is forced to equal startDate, so naming either one is enough — with duration 0 and progress that is only ever 0 or 100 (100 exactly when it is in the workspace's finished status). Setting isMilestone on a task that already has a date range collapses it onto its start date. WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE. Tasks nest via wbsParentId, and every task carries a read-only wbscode — its dotted outline number within the project ("1", "2.3", "2.3.1") — plus issummary. wbsParentId is NOT a scheduling dependency: a WBS child sits INSIDE its parent's span and in fact defines it, whereas a predecessor runs BEFORE its successor. Predecessors are their own resource — create_task_dependency — and are unrelated to nesting. A task with at least one WBS child is a SUMMARY TASK and owns none of its own schedule: its startDate, endDate, duration, percentComplete and status are all recomputed from its children (dates span the children; progress is their span-weighted average). Writing any of those on a summary returns 422 — change the children instead. wbscode is derived from tree position, so it shifts whenever tasks are reordered or re-parented: display it, never store or match on it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
milestonesOnlyNoReturn only milestones (optional, default false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description still adds substantive behavior: Guest visibility narrows to granted projects and strips assignees, results come back in each project's outline order, and milestonesOnly filters server-side. It also discloses the 422 constraint on summary tasks, which an agent cannot learn from annotations or schema.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the bulk of the text is a WBS/milestone treatise covering re-parenting, wbscode derivation, predecessor-vs-parent distinctions and 'set_task_parent'-style write behavior that an agent listing tasks does not need. Far more than a one-parameter read tool warrants, and the actionable parts are buried mid-paragraph rather than structured.

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?

With no output schema, stating 'Returns the API's JSON array, in each project's outline order' usefully covers the return shape, and permission scoping plus server-side filtering round it out. Complete enough to call correctly, though the volume of unrelated WBS material makes it harder to find what is relevant.

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 100% and the single parameter's type/default are already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description does earn some credit by defining what a milestone actually is (dated gate, endDate forced to startDate, duration 0, progress 0/100), which is meaning the schema lacks — but it stops short of 4 because the boolean's own semantics are fully covered by the schema.

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?

Opens with a specific verb, resource and scope: 'List all tasks across every project in the active workspace.' That scope statement alone separates it from list_tasks_by_project and get_task without opening another schema.

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?

Explicitly routes name-based lookup to search ('search is far cheaper on a large workspace') and explains when milestonesOnly is the right choice ('the quickest answer to "what's coming up"'). It never states when to prefer list_tasks_by_project or get_task, so the sibling map is only partly drawn.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources