Autopo

List tasks

list_tasks

Read-onlyIdempotent

The work board: tasks by status, assignee role or goal; q searches titles; mine: true only what you asked for (your requests).

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": "list_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No
`mine`	No
`page`	No
`status`	No
`company`	No	the company id (list_companies); not needed when you have one company, asked for otherwise
`assignee`	No	a role key, e.g. engineer
`page_size`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedNov 2, 2026

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

changedInput schema / properties / company / description

Previous value: -"the company id (list_companies); optional when you have one"New value: +"the company id (list_companies); not needed when you have one company, asked for otherwise"

addedInput schema / properties / page / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[]
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {},
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only filter semantics, saying nothing about result ordering, pagination defaults, or whether filters combine with AND.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single compact sentence with the resource front-loaded and each clause earning its place. The parenthetical '(your requests)' is slightly redundant with 'what you asked for' and reads awkwardly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the read-only nature is fully annotated. Still, for a 7-parameter paginated list tool, the description leaves pagination behavior and status value vocabulary unaddressed and mentions a filter that does not exist.

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 only 29%, so the description carries real weight here and does explain `q` (searches titles) and `mine` (your own requests) — meaning the schema does not provide. But `page`, `page_size`, and `status` values remain unexplained, and the reference to a 'goal' filter maps to no parameter at all.

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?

Names the resource (tasks on the work board) and the filtering axes (status, assignee role, goal), which distinguishes it from get_task/create_task/update_task. The verb is only implied by the tool name, and 'goal' is cited as a filter even though no such parameter exists in the schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the filter list rather than stated: an agent can infer this is for browsing collections while get_task fetches one. There is no explicit 'use this instead of X' routing and no mention of when not 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 Autopo 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?