md-doc

tasks_list

Lista resúmenes de tareas recurrentes {id, title, priority, state, dateIs, nextDueDate, intervalCount, intervalUnit, scheduleMode, inProgressBy, inProgressSince, lastDoneOn}. state: draft | scheduled | due | in_progress; dateIs: overdue | today | soon | later. Sin folderId devuelve todas las que ve el usuario (propias y de carpetas compartidas), la que vence antes primero. Con state ["due"] solo las que ya se pueden hacer, de la más urgente a la menos: "¿qué toca hacer?". Con folderId lista las de esa carpeta (null = raíz).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "tasks_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`state`	No	Filtra por estado
`folderId`	No	ID de carpeta de tareas; null = raíz; omitir = todas

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does well: it discloses ordering (soonest due first; most urgent first for state=["due"]), visibility scope (own plus shared-folder tasks), and default semantics of the missing filter. It omits pagination, result limits, and any permission requirements.

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?

One dense but well-ordered paragraph: return shape first, then enum vocabularies, then the three filtering behaviors in order of importance. No filler sentences; every clause carries information the agent needs.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the return shape, ordering, filtering, and visibility scope. Only pagination/limits and auth expectations are missing, which are minor for this complexity.

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 coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains what the state enum values represent, that folderId null means root while omitting it means all folders, and ties the filter choice to an intent. The dateIs values are explained as part of the returned summary rather than as a parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a concrete verb+resource: 'Lista resúmenes de tareas recurrentes', and immediately enumerates the summary fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not name or contrast any sibling tool (e.g. tasks_search, tasks_get), which keeps it just below a 5.

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 situational guidance: omit folderId to see everything the user can see, use state ["due"] for the 'what should I do now?' view, use folderId to scope to one folder. It lacks explicit when-not guidance or a named alternative for other listing/filtering needs.

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

All md-doc 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?