idea-base-mcp-server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

add_tasks_to_sprint

Commit tasks to a sprint with per-task validation, returning which tasks were added and which were refused and why. Tasks already in another sprint stay put.

Instructions

Commit tasks to a sprint. Each task is checked on its own and the result says which were added and which were refused and why — a task already in another sprint is REFUSED, not moved, because a task belongs to at most one. Tasks must belong to a project under the sprint's product.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sprint_id": "<sprint_id>",
      "task_ids": "<task_ids>"
    },
    "name": "add_tasks_to_sprint"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_ids`	Yes	Task ids to commit (max 100)
`sprint_id`	Yes	The sprint to add to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.7.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses important behavior: tasks are checked individually, partial success is possible, refusals are reported with reasons, and tasks in another sprint are not moved. It omits permission or auth requirements, but it is strong for an unannotated 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 front-loaded, compact, and every sentence adds value. The refusal semantics are stated efficiently without redundant wording.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description explains the critical refusal behavior and ownership constraint well. It could be slightly more explicit about the response shape or other failure modes, but it is largely complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines both parameters. The description still adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that task_ids must belong to a project under the sprint's product and that each task is validated independently.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Commit tasks to a sprint." This clearly distinguishes the action from list/get tools and from remove_tasks_from_sprint, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It states key constraints — tasks must belong to a project under the sprint's product, and tasks already in another sprint are refused — which implies when the tool is appropriate. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus siblings like remove_tasks_from_sprint or create_sprint.

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