Skip to main content
Glama

Clear task N/A

clear_task_not_applicable
Idempotent

Put a task marked not-applicable back to incomplete, so it needs doing again. It does nothing to a completed task -- use uncomplete_task for that. A task that is already incomplete is left alone and the call still succeeds.

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": {
      "checklistKey": "<checklistKey>",
      "taskKey": "<taskKey>"
    },
    "name": "clear_task_not_applicable"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskKeyYesThe task's key, a GUID.
checklistKeyYesThe checklist's key, a GUID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the operation does nothing to completed tasks, leaves already-incomplete tasks alone, and still succeeds. This adds concrete behavioral context beyond idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, especially around edge-case outcomes.

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 three tight sentences with no wasted language. The core behavior is front-loaded, followed by the important edge cases and alternative tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and relevant annotations, the description covers the key behavioral distinctions an agent needs. No output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary.

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 both required parameters are already documented as GUIDs in the schema. The description does not add further parameter semantics, which is acceptable given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a precise state transition: resetting a not-applicable task to incomplete so it needs doing again. It clearly distinguishes this from uncomplete_task, which handles completed tasks. The verb and resource are specific enough to separate it from sibling tools like set_task_not_applicable.

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?

It explicitly says what to use for completed tasks by naming uncomplete_task, and it explains the no-op behavior for already-incomplete tasks. This gives the agent clear when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and alternative guidance.

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.