Skip to main content
Glama

List Tasks

list-tasks-tool
Read-onlyIdempotent

List tasks in the CRM with optional filters and pagination.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (max 1,000,000).
sortNoSort by field. Properties: field (string), direction (asc|desc).
filterNoAn object of conditions. Keys starting with $ are keywords: operators ($eq, $contains, $is_empty, $gt, $gte, $lt, $lte, $has_any, $has_none, $in, $not_in) and logic ($and and $or take a list of condition objects, $not takes one and also returns records where the inner fields are empty). Other keys are names. A filter holds at most 20 conditions, 3 levels of $and, $or and $not, and 2 levels of relations. A list holds at most 100 values. Email values match in any letter case. Phone values match in any format, and the operand needs a country code such as +1 415 555 0100. Link values match in any letter case, with or without the scheme. Domain values match as a bare host or a full URL, with or without www. Tags-input values match the exact stored value. Date-time values match a date without a time, such as 2026-10-01, as that whole day. Email and link fields also take a domain sub-field with $in or $not_in, such as {"domain":{"$in":["acme.com"]}}, which matches the host of each value. $not_in and $has_none also match records where the field is empty. $is_empty takes true or false. Native fields: title, created_at, updated_at, creation_source. Relations take $in, $not_in or $is_empty on record ids, or conditions on the related record that use that record type's own filter names, including custom_fields. Prefer conditions over listing the related records first and passing their ids: companies (company), people (people), opportunities (opportunity). Member relations take $in, $not_in or $is_empty on workspace member ids only, with no nested conditions: creator, assignees. assigned_to_me takes $eq with true, to list the tasks assigned to you, for example {"assigned_to_me":{"$eq":true}}. custom_fields takes an object keyed by custom field code, each value an operator object. Native fields and relations sit at the top level of filter. get-crm-schema-tool lists those codes with their type and options under filterable_fields.custom_fields, and the operators, matching rule and example of each type under filterable_fields.types. Example: {"title":{"$contains":"Acme"},"$or":[{"creation_source":{"$eq":"api"}},{"created_at":{"$gte":"2026-01-01"}}]}.
includeNoSingular relationships or relationship counts to expand. Use a show tool for to-many records.
per_pageNoResults per page (default 15, max 25).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageYes
itemsYes
totalYes
has_moreYes
per_pageYes
next_pageYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the description carries a lighter burden. It still adds nothing beyond them: no default ordering, no statement of what a page returns or how totals are exposed, and no hint that filters must stay within complexity limits (that lives only in the schema).

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 short, front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core action and the two modifiers appear immediately.

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 output schema, full per-parameter docs, and safety annotations together cover most of what an agent needs, leaving only default sort order and result-count behaviour unexplained. The description is thin but the surrounding structured data is rich, so nothing critical is missing.

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% and the filter parameter is documented in extreme detail, so the description's bare mention of 'filters and pagination' adds no meaning. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific verb and resource (list tasks) and adds the retrieval mode (filters, pagination). It is distinguishable from the create/update/delete task tools by verb and from the list-* family by resource, though it never explicitly names a sibling or contrasts with get-task-tool.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Mentions optional filters and pagination, which implies 'use this to browse/filter many tasks', but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not, and no pointer to get-task-tool for a single record or to a search alternative.

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.