Mundane

get_task_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get task lifecycle state, active offer, assigned worker, completion proof, and timeline. Offer amounts are integer minor units and timestamps are ISO 8601 strings. Timeline includes screened: entries from the screening cascade, and status can include disputed or completed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_id`	Yes	The owned task to inspect.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`offer`	No
`status`	No
`worker`	No
`task_id`	No
`timeline`	No
`completion`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / task_id / description
```
Added value: +"The owned task to inspect."
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "completion": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": true,
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Completion"
+    },
+    "offer": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": true,
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Offer"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Status"
+    },
+    "task_id": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Task Id"
+    },
+    "timeline": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {},
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Timeline"
+    },
+    "worker": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": true,
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Worker"
+    }
+  },
+  "title": "TaskStatusOut",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail: integer minor units for offers, ISO 8601 timestamps, screened:<outcome> timeline entries, and possible statuses including disputed or completed.

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?

Three compact sentences, each carrying distinct information: what is returned, the value formats, and special timeline/status semantics. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, this is complete. It covers data formats and domain-specific values that would otherwise be a surprise, and there are no missing prerequisites or alternatives that need mentioning.

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 coverage is 100%: task_id is described as 'The owned task to inspect.' The description adds no extra parameter semantics, which is acceptable because the schema already documents the sole parameter.

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 ('Get') and enumerates the distinct resources returned: lifecycle state, active offer, assigned worker, completion proof, and timeline. This makes it distinguishable from sibling tools like get_task_chat, get_task_proof, and get_spend_status based on content alone.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over siblings such as get_task_chat or get_task_proof. The description simply restates the response contents, so an agent must infer the appropriate use case.

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

All Mundane tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.