Skip to main content
Glama

cozi_mark_item_complete

Check off completed items in Cozi lists to track progress and maintain organized family tasks and shopping lists.

Instructions

Mark an item as complete/done in a Cozi list. This checks off the item.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemIdYesThe ID of the item to mark complete
listIdYesThe ID of the list containing the item

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'cozi_mark_item_complete' tool within the executeTool switch statement. It calls the CoziClient's markItem method to mark the specified item as complete and returns a success message.
    case 'cozi_mark_item_complete': {
      await client.markItem(args.list_id, args.item_id, true);
      return {
        success: true,
        message: 'Item marked as complete',
      };
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'cozi_mark_item_complete' tool, specifying required list_id and item_id parameters.
    {
      name: 'cozi_mark_item_complete',
      description: 'Mark a Cozi list item as complete',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          list_id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The ID of the list containing the item',
          },
          item_id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The ID of the item to mark complete',
          },
        },
        required: ['list_id', 'item_id'],
      },
    },
  • CoziClient helper method that performs the actual API PUT request to mark a list item as complete or incomplete.
    async markItem(listId: string, itemId: string, completed: boolean): Promise<void> {
      await this.request(`/${this.accountId}/list/${listId}/item/${itemId}`, {
        method: 'PUT',
        headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
        body: JSON.stringify({ status: completed ? 'complete' : 'incomplete' }),
      });
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('checks off') but doesn't mention whether this is reversible, if it requires specific permissions, what happens to the item after marking (e.g., hidden or archived), or any side effects. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with two short, direct sentences that communicate the core action without any fluff. It's front-loaded and every word serves a clear purpose, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'complete/done' means in this context, whether the change is permanent, what the expected response looks like, or how it integrates with other tools. Given the complexity and lack of structured data, more context is needed.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters clearly documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline for adequate but not exceptional coverage.

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 verb ('mark as complete/done', 'checks off') and resource ('item in a Cozi list'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'cozi_mark_item_incomplete' beyond the opposite state, missing an opportunity for clearer sibling distinction.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cozi_edit_item' or 'cozi_remove_item'. It mentions the action but lacks context about prerequisites, typical workflows, or when this is the appropriate choice among sibling tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/BrandCast-Signage/cozi-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server