Skip to main content
Glama

TaScan

by io.github.snowbikemike
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

tascan_update_task

Idempotent

Update a task (title, description, response_type, flags, sort_order). A task that sits in an AI agent inbox is agent input (the runner executes title + description), so ANY edit to it needs the agent:dispatch permission — agent:dispatch:code when the task is or becomes CODE:/SHELL:.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoNew title
task_idYesTask ID
sort_orderNoSort position
assigned_toNoWorker to assign this task to — pass the worker UUID (validated against your org and stored as the worker's name, which is how the worker portal matches "my tasks"). A plain name string is also accepted as-is. Pass null to clear.
descriptionNoNew description
response_typeNoSee tascan_add_tasks for guidance. "text" for info collection, "photo" for visual proof, "checkbox" for yes/no only, "link" for the worker submitting a URL, "url" for the worker visiting a preset URL and confirming, "file" for the worker uploading a file.
requires_photoNoRequire photo
response_configNoResponse configuration. For "choice": {options: [...]}. See tascan_add_tasks.
required_equipmentNoEquipment this task depends on (free text)
is_safety_checkpointNoSafety-critical flag

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / response_type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "checkbox",
-  "photo",
-  "text",
-  "number",
-  "date",
-  "choice",
-  "link",
-  "url",
-  "file"
-]New value: +[
+  "checkbox",
+  "photo",
+  "text",
+  "number",
+  "date",
+  "choice",
+  "link",
+  "url",
+  "file",
+  "signature"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / response_type / description
      Previous value: -"See tascan_add_tasks for guidance. \"text\" for info collection, \"photo\" for visual proof, \"checkbox\" for yes/no only."New value: +"See tascan_add_tasks for guidance. \"text\" for info collection, \"photo\" for visual proof, \"checkbox\" for yes/no only, \"link\" for the worker submitting a URL, \"url\" for the worker visiting a preset URL and confirming, \"file\" for the worker uploading a file."
    • changedInput schema / properties / response_type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "checkbox",
-  "photo",
-  "text",
-  "number",
-  "date",
-  "choice"
-]New value: +[
+  "checkbox",
+  "photo",
+  "text",
+  "number",
+  "date",
+  "choice",
+  "link",
+  "url",
+  "file"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / assigned_to
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Worker to assign this task to — pass the worker UUID (validated against your org and stored as the worker's name, which is how the worker portal matches \"my tasks\"). A plain name string is also accepted as-is. Pass null to clear.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / required_equipment
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Equipment this task depends on (free text)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_config
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response configuration. For \"choice\": {options: [...]}. See tascan_add_tasks.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / response_type / description
      Previous value: -"Task type"New value: +"See tascan_add_tasks for guidance. \"text\" for info collection, \"photo\" for visual proof, \"checkbox\" for yes/no only."
  6. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the mutation and idempotency profile is covered. The description adds valuable non-structured behavior: the agent:dispatch permission requirement and the special agent:dispatch:code escalation when a task is or becomes a CODE:/SHELL: task. This is exactly the auth-context the annotations cannot express.

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?

One sentence for the update scope, a second for the permission rule, both front-loaded with no filler. Slightly dense on the permission clause, but every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers a 10-param mutation tool with nested objects adequately: field scope is named and the permission gate is disclosed, which is the most failure-prone aspect. With annotations covering idempotency and no output schema to explain, the only gap is an explicit pointer to sibling alternatives.

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 the schema already documents all ten parameters including the response_type enum and nested response_config. The description names a few fields but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 (update a task) and enumerates the mutable fields in parentheses. It distinguishes itself from siblings like tascan_get_task or tascan_delete_task, though it does not explicitly contrast against tascan_update_subtask or tascan_complete_task. Clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

The description implies when the tool applies (editing an existing task) and layers in a permission prerequisite. But it never states when to use this versus tascan_complete_task or tascan_update_subtask, and no exclusions are given. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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

All TaScan toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources