Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tick-mcp

tick-mcp

by KpihX
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

full_sync

Get a complete overview of your TickTick account: all projects, tasks, tags, folders, and inbox ID in one sync call.

Instructions

Full V2 sync — all projects, tasks, tags, folders in ONE call.

[Category: Sync]  [Auth: V2]
[Related: get_all_tasks, list_projects, list_tags, list_project_folders]

Returns: {inboxId, projects, tasks, tags, folders, task_count}.
Best for getting a complete overview of the account.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "full_sync"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions sync and return fields but does not disclose read-only vs destructive behavior, auth needs, rate limits, or any side effects.

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?

Extremely concise: one key sentence plus metadata line and return fields. No redundant words, front-loaded with action and resource.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, description covers purpose, scope, and return fields. Lacks behavioral context but is adequate for a simple parameterless sync tool.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, which is the default case. Description does not need to add parameter details; baseline 4 is appropriate as it implies parameterless usage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool performs a full V2 sync of all projects, tasks, tags, and folders in one call. It specifies the resource scope and distinguishes from granular sibling tools like get_all_tasks and list_projects.

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?

Explicitly states 'Best for getting a complete overview of the account' and lists related sibling tools, implying when to use. Does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternative selection criteria.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools