Taskin

Hire a human for a task

submit_human_task

Create a real task on Taskin so a person carries out one bounded action - either in the physical world or as remote human judgment such as QA, content review, AI-output evaluation or customer feedback. Call this after search_human_task returned can_taskin_help = true. The task becomes an ordinary Taskin task, visible and manageable in the Taskin product, and returns a task_id you poll with get_task_status. This tool cannot charge anyone and cannot create a financially binding transaction: Taskin does not hold or process funds, and compensation is agreed and settled directly with the participant. If required information is missing, nothing is created and the response names each missing field in next_action instead.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`budget`	No	Compensation offered. Settled directly with the participant.
`context`	No	Optional. Helps Taskin return better-matched participants and a sharper brief. Leave empty if you prefer; every tool works without it.
`currency`	No	ISO 4217 currency code for the budget.
`deadline`	No	Deadline or time window the person must work within.
`location`	No	Where the task happens. Required for physical and hybrid tasks.
`principal`	No	The person or organisation on whose behalf you are acting. Strongly recommended.
`deliverable`	Yes	The artifacts the result must contain, e.g. 'three photographs of the display plus the shelf price of each product in a structured list'.
`requirements`	No	Constraints, prohibited actions, access details, credentials required, and background.
`contact_email`	No	Email Taskin uses to coordinate this task with the principal.
`idempotency_key`	No	Repeat the same key to retry safely without creating a duplicate task.
`taskin_agent_id`	No	Taskin-issued agent identifier from an earlier response.
`participant_slug`	No	Request a specific Taskin participant by slug, from search_human_task matches. Optional.
`task_description`	Yes	The bounded real-world action the person performs, concrete enough that a stranger could execute it without asking questions.
`remote_or_physical`	No	Execution mode. Defaults to physical when a location is given.
`verification_requirements`	Yes	The objective check that decides whether the result is accepted, e.g. 'photographs are timestamped and show the storefront name'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / context

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. Helps Taskin return better-matched participants and a sharper brief. Leave empty if you prefer; every tool works without it.",
+  "properties": {
+    "goal": {
+      "description": "Optional. The larger outcome your workflow is working toward (one sentence).",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "principal_type": {
+      "description": "Optional. What kind of principal you act for. Do not include names or contact details here.",
+      "enum": [
+        "individual",
+        "company",
+        "agency_or_reseller",
+        "not_disclosed"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "timing": {
+      "description": "Optional. When the human step is needed.",
+      "enum": [
+        "today",
+        "this_week",
+        "later",
+        "no_task_yet"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "upstream_step": {
+      "description": "Optional. What your workflow did just before deciding it needs a person.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "visit_reason": {
+      "description": "Optional. Why you are calling Taskin today.",
+      "enum": [
+        "have_a_task_now",
+        "evaluating_options_for_someone",
+        "building_an_integration",
+        "gathering_facts_to_cite",
+        "testing_the_interface",
+        "other"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that no funds are held or processed, that no financially binding transaction is created, that the task becomes visible/manageable in the Taskin product, and that missing required fields cause nothing to be created with the gaps listed in next_action. The idempotency behavior is also signposted via the retry key, which offsets idempotentHint=false in the annotations without contradicting it.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then the prerequisite, then the payment caveat, then the failure mode - a sensible ordering. It runs five dense sentences, and the payment disclaimer is slightly verbose, but each sentence carries distinct decision-relevant information.

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?

For a 15-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value (task_id), the polling path, the payment constraint, and the error shape with next_action. Only minor gaps remain, such as what the created task looks like or how participant_slug affects matching, but the agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 every one of the 15 parameters is already documented in the schema, and the description adds little parameter-specific guidance beyond the settlement note for budget. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries this much detail; nothing in the description meaningfully extends parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a real task on Taskin') plus the scope of what qualifies ('one bounded action - either in the physical world or as remote human judgment such as QA, content review, AI-output evaluation'). The physical-vs-remote framing also separates it cleanly from siblings like search_human_task and get_task_status.

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?

Gives an explicit gating prerequisite ('Call this after search_human_task returned can_taskin_help = true') and names the follow-up tool ('poll with get_task_status'), so the agent knows both the entry condition and the next step. The alternative for exploration, search_human_task, is named directly.

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

All Taskin tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context Every Agent Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and keep it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?