Skip to main content
Glama

clickup

by io.usefulapi

Search tasks

clickup_search_tasks
Read-only

Search/filter tasks across a whole workspace (team), optionally scoped to spaces/folders/lists. ClickUp's "Get Filtered Team Tasks". ClickUp REST: GET /team/{team_id}/task.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo0-indexed page number for pagination.
reverseNoReverse the sort order (serialized true/false).
team_idYesThe workspace (team) id.
list_idsNoRestrict to these list ids (repeated list_ids[] params).
order_byNoSort field, e.g. 'created', 'updated', 'due_date', 'id'.
statusesNoFilter by status names (repeated statuses[] params), e.g. ["open","in progress"].
assigneesNoFilter by assignee user ids (repeated assignees[] params).
space_idsNoRestrict to these space ids (repeated space_ids[] params).
due_date_gtNoOnly tasks due after this Unix time in ms.
due_date_ltNoOnly tasks due before this Unix time in ms.
project_idsNoRestrict to these folder/project ids (repeated project_ids[] params).
include_closedNoInclude closed tasks (serialized true/false).

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation is read-only, so the description doesn't need to restate that. The description adds the workspace-wide scope and API endpoint, which is useful but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination behavior or result limits. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate but not extensive.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes a helpful API reference. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words or redundant 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?

Given the tool has 12 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential context: it searches/filters tasks across a workspace with optional scoping. It doesn't elaborate on return format, but the purpose is clear enough for a read-only search tool, and the schema handles parameter details. A slightly more explicit mention of what the response contains would make it fully complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 12 parameters, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds general context about scoping to spaces/folders/lists, which maps to existing parameters, but it doesn't provide additional semantic depth beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool searches and filters tasks across a whole workspace, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like clickup_get_tasks by emphasizing the workspace-wide scope, and it also references the exact ClickUp API endpoint for additional clarity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: when searching/filtering tasks across an entire workspace, optionally scoped to spaces/folders/lists. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusions, but the description's emphasis on workspace-wide search differentiates it from list-specific task retrieval tools.

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

All clickup 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a unique resource+action combination, with clear scoping (e.g., get_tasks vs search_tasks differ by list vs workspace, list_lists vs list_folderless_lists by parent). No two tools appear to do the same thing, and the descriptions make boundaries explicit.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (create_, get_, list_, search_, update_+resource), prefixed with clickup_. No camelCase or unconventional verbs are present.

Tool Count5/5

14 tools is a well-scoped size for a project management API, covering hierarchy traversal (workspaces, spaces, folders, lists), task operations, comments, and user info. Each tool serves a clear purpose without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers core CRUD for tasks (create, read, update) and comments, plus full hierarchy listing and search. Minor gaps include no delete task/comment and no update/list operations for folders/lists, but these are workable and don't hinder the primary workflows.

Resources