Skip to main content
Glama

cozi_mark_item_incomplete

Mark items as incomplete in Cozi lists to track pending tasks and shopping items. Unchecks completed items to maintain accurate task status across your family's shared lists.

Instructions

Mark an item as incomplete/not done in a Cozi list. This unchecks the item.

Input Schema

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

Implementation Reference

  • src/tools.ts:95-112 (registration)
    Registration of the 'cozi_mark_item_incomplete' tool including its input schema definition in the COZI_TOOLS array.
    {
      name: 'cozi_mark_item_incomplete',
      description: 'Mark a Cozi list item as incomplete',
      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 incomplete',
          },
        },
        required: ['list_id', 'item_id'],
      },
    },
  • Handler logic in executeTool function that marks the item incomplete by calling CoziClient.markItem and returns a success response.
    case 'cozi_mark_item_incomplete': {
      await client.markItem(args.list_id, args.item_id, false);
      return {
        success: true,
        message: 'Item marked as incomplete',
      };
    }
  • CoziClient helper method that performs the API PUT request to update item status to incomplete (when completed=false).
    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?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it states the action ('mark incomplete') and effect ('unchecks the item'), it doesn't mention permissions required, whether the change is reversible, error conditions, or what happens if the item is already incomplete. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 sentences that directly communicate the tool's purpose and effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information or unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose but lacks important contextual details about permissions, side effects, error handling, and response format. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters, but overall completeness is only adequate for this simple tool.

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 schema. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema (itemId and listId are self-explanatory). This meets the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 specific action ('Mark an item as incomplete/not done') and resource ('in a Cozi list'), with the additional clarifying detail 'This unchecks the item.' It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'cozi_mark_item_complete' by specifying the opposite state change.

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?

The description implies usage context by specifying it's for marking items incomplete in Cozi lists, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cozi_edit_item' or 'cozi_remove_item'. The naming convention with 'cozi_mark_item_complete' as a sibling provides some implicit differentiation, but no explicit guidance is given.

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