Skip to main content
Glama

aidelly

by io.github.wilzer

aidelly_list_tasks

Read-onlyIdempotent

List workspace tasks with optional filtering by status, assignee, or ownership. Supports offset pagination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mineNo
limitNo
queryNoOptional query overrides for endpoints with sparse parameter schemas.
cursorNo
offsetNo
statusNo
assigneeNo
brand_idNo
workspace_idNoWorkspace to operate in. Do not ask the user for this UUID — call aidelly_list_workspaces and use the `id` of the matching workspace. Optional for read operations; required when creating content.
include_completedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "maxLength": 512,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the tool's non-destructive read-only nature is covered. The description adds that it supports offset pagination, which is useful but minimal. It doesn't disclose behavior like default limit, inclusion of completed tasks (which is controlled by a default param), or response format traits beyond pagination.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single concise sentence that upfront states the core purpose and then lists key options (filtering and pagination). There is no unnecessary filler or repetition of schema information. It is well-structured for quick AI consumption.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 10 parameters, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is too sparse. It doesn't indicate what the response contains (e.g., task objects, total count), how cursor and offset interact, or the meaning of mine versus assignee. For a list operation with many optional filters, the description lacks critical context needed for correct invocation and interpretation of results.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 20%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. The description mentions filtering by status, assignee, and ownership, which partially covers status, assignee, and mine, but it fails to explain limit, cursor, offset, include_completed, brand_id, and query. Ownership is ambiguous—does 'mine' mean assigned to the current user? The description does not fully bridge the schema's low coverage, leaving significant gaps.

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?

The description clearly states the tool lists workspace tasks with optional filtering by status, assignee, or ownership. It identifies the resource and action, but it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling list tools (e.g., aidelly_list_posts, aidelly_get_task), so it relies on context rather than explicit differentiation.

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 to use this tool (when listing tasks with filters) and mentions offset pagination, but it provides no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives. It doesn't mention that aidelly_get_task handles single-task retrieval or that other list tools exist for different entities, leaving the usage context largely implicit.

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

All aidelly toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, especially in approvals and post updates. For example, aidelly_action_post_approval and aidelly_post_approvals_id_action both handle approval actions, while aidelly_get_approvals and aidelly_list_pending_approvals appear to serve similar listing functions. The proliferation of HTTP-route-style names with generic prefixes (get_approvals_id, patch_posts_id) further obscures distinctions.

Naming Consistency1/5

The tool set mixes clean verb_noun names (create_post, list_posts) with HTTP-method-plus-path names (get_approvals_id, patch_posts_id, post_analytics_insights). There is no consistent pattern, and 'post' as a verb collides with the content post noun, creating confusion. The inconsistent conventions make it hard to predict tool names.

Tool Count1/5

With 124 tools, this server vastly exceeds the typical MCP server scope and the calibration threshold (50+ is extreme). Even for a comprehensive platform API, such a large surface overwhelms agents and makes selection impractical. The count is a severe mismatch for a usable MCP tool set.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is remarkably comprehensive, covering CRUD for posts, drafts, scheduled posts, tasks, reports, webhooks, workspaces, e-commerce stores, and many more. Advanced features like approvals, repurpose jobs, and content automations are also represented. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit delete for regular posts, only cancel), but the domain is well covered overall.

Resources