Skip to main content
Glama
Cafelatte1

FronyBoard

list_tasks

Lists a project's tasks, including done, cancelled, or tagged work, optionally filtered by period, status, tags, or update time. Use it to review finished or past-quarter work rather than open tasks.

Instructions

Use it when the user asks for finished, cancelled or tagged work, or a past quarter's (done work, tasks by tag).

List one project's tasks, optionally narrowed by period, status, tags or recency.
get_status already lists the open ones; use this for done or cancelled tasks, a closed
period, or a tag cut. get_task when you know the id, search_tasks for text across
projects.

`period` is YYYYQn (all periods, closed ones included, when omitted), `status` is one of
todo | in_progress | done | blocked | cancelled. `tags` narrows to the tasks carrying
*all* of the given labels; pass one tag to match on it alone, and call again per tag
when you want the union. `updated_since` keeps tasks touched after a duration ("24h",
"7d") or ISO timestamp. A row carries `waiting_on` (the ids from its `depends_on` not yet
done) only when there are any. Cancelled tasks are excluded unless `include_cancelled`
is set or `status` is 'cancelled'.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes
tagsNo
periodNo
statusNo
updated_sinceNo
include_cancelledNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the default that cancelled tasks are excluded unless include_cancelled is set or status='cancelled', that omitting period includes closed periods, and that rows carry `waiting_on` only when non-empty. It does not state read-only/safety or result size/ordering limits, which keeps it short of a 5 for an unannotated tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with intent, then routing, then parameter semantics – a logical order with dense, non-repetitive sentences. It is longer than strictly necessary (the tags union advice sits in the same block as core semantics), but no sentence is filler.

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 six-parameter filtered-list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers triggering intent, alternatives, every parameter's format and filter interaction, default exclusion behavior, and the one non-obvious output field (`waiting_on`). Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description documents every parameter: `period` as YYYYQn with omitted-means-all-periods semantics, `status` with its full enum (todo | in_progress | done | blocked | cancelled), `tags` AND-semantics plus the per-tag union advice, `updated_since` accepting durations like '24h'/'7d' or ISO timestamps, and `include_cancelled` interacting with status. This more than compensates for the empty 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?

States the specific verb and resource ('List one project's tasks') plus its narrowing dimensions, and explicitly distinguishes itself from get_status ('already lists the open ones'), get_task (by id) and search_tasks (cross-project text). An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The opening sentence gives the triggering user intent ('finished, cancelled or tagged work, or a past quarter's'), and the alternatives section names when to use get_status, get_task and search_tasks instead. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are explicit.

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