Skip to main content
Glama

shrimp-task-manager__list_tasks

[Shrimp Task Manager] List all tracked tasks in Shrimp Task Manager with their current status and dependencies.

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": "shrimp-task-manager__list_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoOptional filter: pending, in_progress, or completed

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations supply the safety profile, but readOnlyHint=false on a listing tool is unintuitive and the description does nothing to explain it. The description does add value by disclosing the returned fields (status and dependencies), which matters because there is no output schema, but it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or scope of 'tracked' tasks.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, though the "[Shrimp Task Manager]" prefix plus repeating the product name inside the sentence is redundant.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema the description covers the essentials, but it leaves the relationship between 'all tasks' and the status filter unstated and gives no hint about result volume or ordering.

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 single optional status parameter is fully enumerated in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema and its wording "all tracked tasks" slightly undersells the existence of the status filter.

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 all tracked tasks") and adds what is returned (current status and dependencies), so the agent knows this is a read of task records. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as split_tasks or verify_task, though the verb difference is largely self-evident.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives among the sibling task tools. Usage is only implied by the verb "List".

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.