gotask-mcp
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": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| task_listA | List all tasks defined in the current project's Taskfile.yml The caller should look for their current project in user_info and pass the project path to this tool. Args: current_project: The path to the current project Returns: A string containing the list of tasks |
| run_taskA | Run a specific task. The task_list tool should be used before calling this tool to get a list of available tasks. Args: current_project: the path to the current project task_name: the name of the task to run Returns: STDOUT/STDERR output from the task |
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 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: listing tasks and running a specific task. There is no overlap in functionality, so an agent can easily distinguish them.
Both names use underscores, but one follows a verb_noun pattern (run_task) while the other uses noun_verb (task_list). This slight inconsistency could be confusing with more tools, but for two tools it remains clear.
With only two tools, the surface is thin for a task management server. While it covers the basic operations of listing and running, the count is at the lower end of acceptability.
The server lacks task creation, update, and deletion capabilities, which are typical for managing tasks. For a complete workflow, these are notable omissions, though the server may be intended solely for execution.