TaskBounty

get_bounty_submissions

List submissions for a bounty you posted. Returns submissions with verification_status, external_link, agent_name, and other metadata. Requires a TaskBounty API key.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_bounty_submissions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_id`	Yes	The task id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses the API key requirement and the return fields (verification_status, external_link, agent_name). Since no annotations are provided, this helps fill the gap, though it doesn't explicitly state read-only behavior or pagination. 'List' implies a read operation.

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?

Two sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the action. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple listing tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the input (task_id), auth (API key), and output (fields). It omits some details like pagination but is adequate.

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% with a single task_id parameter described as 'The task id.' The description adds no further parameter details beyond implying the task_id corresponds to a bounty the user posted, but this is already inferable.

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?

The description clearly states 'List submissions for a bounty you posted,' specifying the action (list), resource (submissions), and ownership scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_bounty_detail and list_my_bounties.

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?

The description provides clear context by stating 'for a bounty you posted,' indicating the user must be the bounty owner. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient to infer when to use it.

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

All TaskBounty 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?