Skip to main content
Glama

list_my_tasks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Answers "what is on my plate", "my tasks this week" and "what do I have overdue" from the user's Onplana workspace. List tasks assigned to YOU (the calling user), and tasks you collaborate on. Resolves "me" server-side - no need to pass an assignee id. Each row's role is "assignee" or "collaborator"; a collaborator row also names the assignee in assigneeName. Optional scope: "assigned" (the default, the tasks above) or "managed", every task in the projects you manage (projects you own, or where your project role can edit the project), whoever holds it; a row there you are not on has role "manager" and names its assignee. Optional filters: status (TODO / IN_PROGRESS / REVIEW / DONE / BLOCKED), overdueOnly (only tasks past due date and not DONE). Default returns 25, max 50. PREFER list_assigned_tasks when YOU are an AI agent - that variant adds agentBrief, projectName, and hasOpenPrompt to each row so you can start work without a follow-up get_task. Use list_tasks instead when querying across multiple users. When the response carries hasMore true, more tasks match than the limit returned and total counts them all.

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_my_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoDefault 25, max 50.
scopeNo"assigned" (default): tasks you hold or collaborate on. "managed": every task in the projects you manage.
statusNo
overdueOnlyNoOnly return tasks due before today in the time zone of the user and not yet DONE (a task due today is not overdue).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / overdueOnly / description
      Previous value: -"Only return tasks past their due date and not yet DONE."New value: +"Only return tasks due before today in the time zone of the user and not yet DONE (a task due today is not overdue)."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / scope
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "\"assigned\" (default): tasks you hold or collaborate on. \"managed\": every task in the projects you manage.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "assigned",
      +    "managed"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description correctly spends its words elsewhere: it explains server-side identity resolution, the meaning of each row's `role` (assignee/collaborator/manager) and `assigneeName`, and that hasMore/total signal truncation. It does not discuss ordering of results or permissions nuance beyond the scope definition, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Purpose and scope come first, then filters, then sibling routing, then pagination – a sensible front-loaded order with no filler sentences. It is dense and somewhat long for a list tool, and the quoted example queries add length without adding invocation detail.

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?

There is no output schema, so describing row-level fields (role, assigneeName) and the hasMore/total truncation contract is exactly the missing context an agent needs, and it is supplied. Remaining gaps are minor: result ordering and the other task fields returned are not described.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 75% schema coverage the baseline is already high, yet the description adds real meaning: `managed` is spelled out as projects you own or where your project role can edit, and the row-level consequence of that scope (role "manager" plus assignee name) is described. The status enum and limit bounds merely restate the schema, so it is not a full 5.

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 opens with a concrete verb+resource framing ("List tasks assigned to YOU ... and tasks you collaborate on") and anchors it in user-intent phrases like "what is on my plate" and "what do I have overdue". It explicitly separates itself from list_assigned_tasks and list_tasks, so an agent can pick it without inspecting other schemas.

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 gives both a positive rule (use for the calling user's own and collaborated tasks, with "me" resolved server-side) and explicit routing away: prefer list_assigned_tasks for AI agents because of agentBrief/projectName/hasOpenPrompt, and use list_tasks for cross-user queries. That is when/when-not/alternative guidance in full.

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.