TrendIdea

update_task

Idempotent

Mark a task in the First 100 Days weekly plan as completed, or reopen it. Use it to keep the launch plan in sync as you execute. Not read-only but idempotent: setting a task to the same completed state again changes nothing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ideaId`	Yes	The idea ID
`completed`	Yes	true to mark as done, false to reopen
`taskIndex`	Yes	Task index within the week (0-based)
`weekNumber`	Yes	Week number (1-14)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	The tool result rendered as human and AI readable text or markdown.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context by explicitly stating the tool is 'not read-only' (matching readOnlyHint=false) and elaborates on idempotency, which provides confidence for the agent. It does not describe potential side effects (e.g., cascading changes), but the combination of annotations and description is nearly complete.

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?

The description is two sentences long, each with a distinct purpose: the first states core functionality, the second adds usage and behavioral nuance. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown), 4 required parameters (all documented), and accurate annotations, the description is adequate. It clearly explains the tool's role and idempotency. Lacks one point because it does not mention the output or any prerequisites (e.g., that the task must exist), but the schema and annotations cover most needs.

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%, so all four parameters are documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses specific verbs ('mark' and 'reopen') and clearly identifies the resource ('task in the First 100 Days weekly plan'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_tasks' (read-only) and 'trigger_first_100_days' (creation) by focusing on state mutation of individual tasks.

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?

The description explicitly states the tool's purpose ('keep the launch plan in sync as you execute') and provides clear guidance on idempotency ('setting a task to the same completed state again changes nothing'). It implies a when-to-use scenario (updating task status) and distinguishes from related tools like 'get_tasks'.

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

All TrendIdea tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function or data aspect, from idea CRUD to simulations, content generation, and team management. Despite the large number, descriptions clearly differentiate purposes, e.g., 'get_idea_summary' vs. 'get_idea_agents' vs. 'get_idea_evolution'. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., 'create_idea', 'get_competitive_density', 'toggle_favorite'). No mixing of conventions like camelCase or abbreviations. The pattern is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count2/5

63 tools is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the platform's broad scope (idea validation, B2B, team, simulations) justifies many, the sheer volume can overwhelm an agent. A more curated subset or grouping would improve coherence.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full startup idea lifecycle: creation, validation, retrieval of various analyses, updates, deletion, sharing, simulations, B2B lead generation, team collaboration, and market intelligence. No obvious gaps exist for the stated domain.

Resources

Need Help?