Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIOProductOS

AIOProductOS

Official
by AIOProductOS
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(2)Admin
JavaScript
Remote

Update Task

update_task
Idempotent

Update task fields by specifying only the changes—omitted fields remain unchanged. Returns the updated task; pass sprint_id: null to remove sprint assignment.

Instructions

Update one or more of a task's fields and return the updated task; fields you omit are left unchanged (idempotent — re-sending the same values is a no-op). Pass sprint_id: null to remove the task from its sprint. Resolve ids first — the task via get_task/list_tasks, and status/feature/insight/sprint/member ids via pm_meta and the list_* reads — never guess them. Only id is required.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "task_8f3a",
      "status_id": "status_in_progress"
    },
    "name": "update_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTask id, from list_tasks or get_task.
titleNoNew title (optional; omitted fields stay unchanged).
priorityNoNew priority level, urgent highest (optional).
sprint_idNoMove into a sprint, or null to remove (optional; resolve via list_sprints).
status_idNoNew status; resolve the id via pm_meta (optional).
feature_idNoFeature id to link on the spine, from pm_meta or list_features (optional).
insight_idNoInsight id to link on the spine, from list_insights (optional).
descriptionNoNew body / details (optional).
assignee_member_idsNoMember ids to assign, from pm_meta (optional).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.14
  2. Removedv0.1.13
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the idempotentHint annotation, the description explains the no-op behavior on repeated sends, that omitted fields remain unchanged, that sprint_id:null removes from sprint, and the mandatory id-resolution step. These are valuable behavioral details not present in annotations.

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?

Four sentences, no fluff. The main purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence adds unique information: what the tool does, partial updates/idempotency, null-removal semantics, and id-resolution guidance.

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?

Given a 9-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: required parameter, optional behavior, id resolution, null semantics, and return value ('return the updated task'). No critical information is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Input schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds collective semantics: partial updates (omitted fields unchanged), null handling for sprint_id, and the rule to resolve ids first. It does not describe every parameter individually but meaningfully supplements the schema.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Update one or more of a task's fields and return the updated task.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling update_* tools targeting other resources. The scope (task fields) is unambiguous.

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?

Provides clear usage context: only id is required, ids must be resolved via get_task/list_tasks and pm_meta/list_* reads, never guessed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the guidance is sufficient and actionable.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools