@maxenlin/mcp-zentao-11-3
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 48 tools
All 48 tools lack descriptions, making it impossible to distinguish their purposes. Many tools have overlapping names (e.g., exportItems, exportStory, exportBug) without any clarifying documentation.
Most tools follow a camelCase pattern (e.g., finishTask, getMyTasks), but there is inconsistency with some using different structures (e.g., initZentao, getConfig) and several similar prefixes (export*, analyze*, generate*) that could confuse an agent.
With 48 tools and no descriptions, the count feels excessive and unwieldy. For a project management tool like ZenTao, this many tools may be justifiable, but the lack of descriptions makes the surface appear bloated and hard to navigate.
The tool set covers tasks, bugs, stories, and test cases, but critical operations like delete are missing (e.g., no deleteTask, deleteBug). Without descriptions, it's unclear if other gaps exist, but the surface seems incomplete for full lifecycle management.