Skip to main content
Glama
IDEAManagement

idea-base-mcp-server

Official

create_task

Add a new task to a project with details like title, due date, and priority. Returns the created task with its unique ID for tracking.

Instructions

Create a new task in a project. Returns the created task with its ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesTitle of the task
due_dateNoDate the task is due, as YYYY-MM-DD.
priorityNoPriority level (0-5, higher is more important)
project_idYesThe ID of the project to add the task to
sort_orderNoPosition among the project's tasks (lower sorts first). NOT wired on the REST create path — POST /api/projects/:id/tasks always assigns MAX(sort_order)+1 and ignores this field on create. Set it after creation with update_task instead.
start_dateNoDate work is planned to start, as YYYY-MM-DD.
descriptionNoDetailed description of the task
is_milestoneNoMark this task as a milestone, drawn differently on the Gantt view. NOT wired on the REST create path — POST /api/projects/:id/tasks does not accept this field; the column is left at its default (0). Set it after creation with update_task instead.
github_pr_urlNoURL of the GitHub Pull Request implementing this task. Used to fetch the PR diff for AI verification and to match incoming CI status (check_run/check_suite/workflow_run webhooks) back to this task.
parent_task_idNoMake this a SUBTASK of the given task. The parent must be in the same project, and a subtask cannot itself have subtasks (one level only). A parent with subtasks takes its status from them: any subtask in progress makes the parent in progress, and all subtasks done makes it ready to complete.
assignee_user_idNoUser ID to assign the task to. Must be a member of the same account. Omit to leave the task unassigned. For a SECOND (or third, ...) assignee, do not call this again — use add_assignee after creation, since this field only ever sets a single owner at create time.
estimated_minutesNoEstimated time to complete in minutes
verification_modeNoGate this task's own completion. "manual" (default) allows a plain status change to done. "ai_review" or "all" BLOCK marking the task done (403 VERIFICATION_REQUIRED) until ai_completion_score reaches 0.8 — run "Verify with AI" first. "ci_required" or "all" BLOCK it until a PR is linked (github_pr_url) with passing CI. Setting this arms a real check against your own future attempt to close the task.
required_ci_checksNoWhich named CI checks (matched case-insensitively as a substring of the check name) must pass for "ci_required"/"all" verification_mode to consider CI satisfied — e.g. ["build","test"]. Read by GET /api/tasks/:id/ci-status's resolveRequiredChecks (app/functions/api/tasks/[id]/ci-status.js:13-32), NOT by the GitHub webhook handler, which sets ci_status unconditionally from whichever single check/workflow event just arrived. Omit to leave unset (falls back to the project's own required_ci_checks, then to requiring every check). NOT wired on the REST create path — POST /api/projects/:id/tasks does not accept this field. Set it after creation with update_task instead.
acceptance_criteriaNoCriteria for task completion

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv2.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / assignee_user_id / description
      Previous value: -"User ID to assign the task to. Must be a member of the same account. Omit to leave the task unassigned."New value: +"User ID to assign the task to. Must be a member of the same account. Omit to leave the task unassigned. For a SECOND (or third, ...) assignee, do not call this again — use add_assignee after creation, since this field only ever sets a single owner at create time."
    • addedInput schema / properties / github_pr_url
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "URL of the GitHub Pull Request implementing this task. Used to fetch the PR diff for AI verification and to match incoming CI status (check_run/check_suite/workflow_run webhooks) back to this task.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / is_milestone
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Mark this task as a milestone, drawn differently on the Gantt view. NOT wired on the REST create path — POST /api/projects/:id/tasks does not accept this field; the column is left at its default (0). Set it after creation with update_task instead.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / required_ci_checks
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Which named CI checks (matched case-insensitively as a substring of the check name) must pass for \"ci_required\"/\"all\" verification_mode to consider CI satisfied — e.g. [\"build\",\"test\"]. Read by GET /api/tasks/:id/ci-status's resolveRequiredChecks (app/functions/api/tasks/[id]/ci-status.js:13-32), NOT by the GitHub webhook handler, which sets ci_status unconditionally from whichever single check/workflow event just arrived. Omit to leave unset (falls back to the project's own required_ci_checks, then to requiring every check). NOT wired on the REST create path — POST /api/projects/:id/tasks does not accept this field. Set it after creation with update_task instead.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / sort_order
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Position among the project's tasks (lower sorts first). NOT wired on the REST create path — POST /api/projects/:id/tasks always assigns MAX(sort_order)+1 and ignores this field on create. Set it after creation with update_task instead.",
      +  "type": "number"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / verification_mode
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Gate this task's own completion. \"manual\" (default) allows a plain status change to done. \"ai_review\" or \"all\" BLOCK marking the task done (403 VERIFICATION_REQUIRED) until ai_completion_score reaches 0.8 — run \"Verify with AI\" first. \"ci_required\" or \"all\" BLOCK it until a PR is linked (github_pr_url) with passing CI. Setting this arms a real check against your own future attempt to close the task.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "manual",
      +    "ai_review",
      +    "ci_required",
      +    "all"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / assignee_user_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "User ID to assign the task to. Must be a member of the same account. Omit to leave the task unassigned.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / due_date
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Date the task is due, as YYYY-MM-DD.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent_task_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Make this a SUBTASK of the given task. The parent must be in the same project, and a subtask cannot itself have subtasks (one level only). A parent with subtasks takes its status from them: any subtask in progress makes the parent in progress, and all subtasks done makes it ready to complete.",
      +  "type": "number"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / start_date
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Date work is planned to start, as YYYY-MM-DD.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return behavior ('Returns the created task with its ID'), which is genuinely useful since there is no output schema. But it says nothing about permissions, side effects, or the fact that several declared parameters are silently ignored on this path.

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?

Two short sentences, purpose front-loaded and return behavior immediately after. No filler, nothing that fails to earn its place.

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?

The description covers purpose and return shape, which compensates for the absent output schema. But for a 15-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and many sibling competitors, it lacks the routing and behavioral context an agent needs to choose it confidently over update_task or the other create_* tools.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the per-parameter docs are unusually detailed, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The tool description adds no parameter information, which is the baseline 3 when coverage is this high.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'Create a new task in a project' — which is unambiguous and cannot be confused with read tools like get_task or list_tasks. However, it does not differentiate itself from the other create_* siblings (create_project, create_product) or position itself relative to update_task.

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?

No when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The schema does reference update_task for several fields that are not wired on the create path, but that routing guidance lives in the parameter descriptions, not the tool description where an agent deciding whether to call create vs update would look.

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