Skip to main content
Glama
DiversioTeam

ClickUp MCP Server

by DiversioTeam

get_assignees

Retrieve assigned team members for a ClickUp task using its ID to manage project responsibilities and workflow coordination.

Instructions

Get assignees of a task

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYesTask ID

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'get_assignees' tool. It resolves the task ID using _resolve_task_id, fetches the task, extracts the assignees, and returns structured data including task ID, list of assignees with details, and count.
    async def get_assignees(self, task_id: str) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Get task assignees."""
        try:
            task = await self._resolve_task_id(task_id)
        except ClickUpAPIError as e:
            return {"error": f"Failed to get assignees for task '{task_id}': {e!s}"}
    
        return {
            "task_id": task.id,
            "assignees": [
                {
                    "id": user.id,
                    "username": user.username,
                    "email": user.email,
                    "initials": user.initials,
                }
                for user in task.assignees
            ],
            "count": len(task.assignees),
        }
  • The input schema definition for the 'get_assignees' tool, specifying that it requires a 'task_id' string parameter.
    Tool(
        name="get_assignees",
        description="Get assignees of a task",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "task_id": {"type": "string", "description": "Task ID"},
            },
            "required": ["task_id"],
        },
    ),
  • Registration of the 'get_assignees' handler function in the tools dictionary within ClickUpTools class init.
    "get_assignees": self.get_assignees,
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. It states a read operation ('Get'), implying it is likely non-destructive, but does not specify permissions required, rate limits, error conditions, or the format of returned data (e.g., list of assignees with details). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this lack of behavioral context is a significant gap, though not contradictory.

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 a single sentence, 'Get assignees of a task', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. It directly communicates the core function without unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient and easy to parse for an AI agent.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a read operation with one parameter), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'assignees' means, the return format, or any behavioral aspects like error handling. This leaves gaps that could hinder the agent's ability to invoke the tool correctly, especially without structured data to compensate.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'task_id' documented as 'Task ID'. The description does not add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema adequately handles parameter semantics without extra description value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get assignees of a task' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('assignees of a task'), making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about what 'assignees' entails (e.g., users, roles, or teams) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_task' or 'list_users', which might provide overlapping or related information. This results in a vague but functional purpose statement.

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. With sibling tools such as 'get_task' (which might include assignee details), 'list_users', and 'search_tasks', there is no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. This absence of usage instructions leaves the agent to infer applicability, which is inadequate for effective tool selection.

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/DiversioTeam/clickup-mcp'

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