Skip to main content
Glama

get_projects

Retrieve all project lists from Dida365, including names, IDs, and color information for task management.

Instructions

获取所有项目(清单)列表。返回所有项目的名称、ID、颜色等信息。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The core API client method that fetches the list of projects from the Dida365 API.
    def get_projects(self) -> List[Dict]:
        """获取所有项目(清单)列表"""
        response = self.client.get("/project")
        response.raise_for_status()
        return response.json()
  • MCP tool definition for 'get_projects' in the server configuration.
    {
        "name": "get_projects",
        "description": "获取所有项目(清单)列表。返回所有项目的名称、ID、颜色等信息。",
        "inputSchema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {},
            "required": [],
        },
    },
  • The tool handler dispatch logic in the server that calls the client method and formats the output.
    if name == "get_projects":
        projects = client.get_projects()
        if not projects:
            return "📭 没有找到任何项目。"
        lines = ["📋 共 %d 个项目:\n" % len(projects)]
        for p in projects:
            lines.append(format_project(p))
            lines.append("")
        return "\n".join(lines)
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 the tool returns project information, but does not describe traits like whether it's read-only (implied by 'get'), potential rate limits, authentication needs, pagination behavior, or error handling. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 concise and well-structured in a single sentence. It front-loads the core purpose ('获取所有项目列表') and efficiently adds details about the returned information. Every part of the sentence earns its place without waste.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple list retrieval with 0 parameters) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does and what it returns, but lacks details on behavioral traits and usage context. For a tool with no output schema, it should ideally describe the return format more explicitly, but it provides enough to understand the basic function.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not add parameter information beyond the schema, but this is acceptable as there are no parameters. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as the description does not need to compensate for any gaps.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: '获取所有项目(清单)列表' (get all projects/list). It specifies the verb ('获取' - get) and resource ('项目' - projects), and mentions the returned information ('名称、ID、颜色等信息' - name, ID, color, etc.). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_project_detail', which might retrieve detailed information for a specific project.

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. It does not mention when to use 'get_projects' (for a list) versus 'get_project_detail' (for details of a specific project) or other siblings like 'get_all_tasks'. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or explicit alternatives stated.

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/Martinqi826/dida-mcp'

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