Skip to main content
Glama

update_project

Modify existing project details in Things 3 task management app by updating title, notes, deadlines, tags, status, or other attributes using project ID.

Instructions

更新现有的项目。需要提供项目ID和授权令牌。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes项目的ID(必需)
authTokenNo授权令牌(如未提供,将使用环境变量THINGS_AUTH_TOKEN)
titleNo新标题
notesNo新备注(替换现有)
prependNotesNo在现有备注前添加
appendNotesNo在现有备注后添加
whenNo时间安排
deadlineNo截止日期
tagsNo标签(替换所有)
addTagsNo添加标签
areaIdNo区域ID
areaNo区域标题
completedNo完成状态
canceledNo取消状态
revealNo是否显示

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for executing the update_project tool. It validates the auth token, spreads args into params, builds the Things 'update-project' URL using buildThingsUrl, opens the URL to perform the update, and returns a success text response.
    async handleUpdateProject(args) {
      const authToken = args.authToken || DEFAULT_AUTH_TOKEN;
      if (!authToken) {
        throw new Error('需要授权令牌。请设置环境变量THINGS_AUTH_TOKEN或在参数中提供authToken');
      }
    
      const params = { ...args, authToken };
      const url = buildThingsUrl('update-project', params);
      await this.openThingsUrl(url);
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: `✅ 项目更新命令已发送 (ID: ${args.id})`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.js:248-317 (registration)
    Tool registration in the ListTools response, defining the name, description, and input schema (JSON Schema) for the update_project tool.
    {
      name: 'update_project',
      description: '更新现有的项目。需要提供项目ID和授权令牌。',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '项目的ID(必需)',
          },
          authToken: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '授权令牌(如未提供,将使用环境变量THINGS_AUTH_TOKEN)',
          },
          title: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '新标题',
          },
          notes: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '新备注(替换现有)',
          },
          prependNotes: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '在现有备注前添加',
          },
          appendNotes: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '在现有备注后添加',
          },
          when: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '时间安排',
          },
          deadline: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '截止日期',
          },
          tags: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '标签(替换所有)',
          },
          addTags: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '添加标签',
          },
          areaId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '区域ID',
          },
          area: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '区域标题',
          },
          completed: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: '完成状态',
          },
          canceled: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: '取消状态',
          },
          reveal: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: '是否显示',
          },
        },
        required: ['id'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.js:433-434 (registration)
    Dispatch case in the CallToolRequest handler switch statement that routes update_project calls to the handleUpdateProject method.
    case 'update_project':
      return await this.handleUpdateProject(args);
  • Utility function used by the handler to construct the Things URL scheme for 'update-project' command with encoded parameters.
    export function buildThingsUrl(command, params = {}) {
      const baseUrl = `things:///${command}`;
      const queryString = buildQueryString(params);
    
      if (!queryString) {
        return baseUrl;
      }
    
      return `${baseUrl}?${queryString}`;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is an update operation (implying mutation) and mentions auth token requirements, but doesn't describe what happens when fields are omitted (partial updates?), whether changes are reversible, error conditions, or what the tool returns. For a mutation tool with 15 parameters and no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise with just one sentence in Chinese. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately states the two required parameters. There's no wasted text, though some might argue it's too brief given the tool's complexity. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with 15 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens during updates, how partial updates work, what the tool returns, or error handling. The agent must rely entirely on the input schema without behavioral context, which is insufficient for safe and effective tool invocation.

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%, so all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by emphasizing that project ID and auth token are required, but doesn't provide additional context about parameter interactions, constraints, or usage patterns. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('更新' meaning 'update') and resource ('现有的项目' meaning 'existing project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'add_project' by specifying it updates existing projects rather than creating new ones. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'update_todo' which might be a similar update operation for different resources.

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 like 'update_todo' or 'add_project'. It mentions the required parameters (project ID and auth token) but doesn't explain prerequisites, use cases, or when other tools might be more appropriate. The agent receives no contextual decision-making help.

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/Mieluoxxx/things_mcp'

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