Skip to main content
Glama
PhilippMT

Software Planning Tool

by PhilippMT

get_todos

Retrieve all tasks in the current software development plan to track progress and manage implementation.

Instructions

Get all todos in the current plan

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP CallToolRequest handler case for 'get_todos': validates current goal exists, fetches todos from storage using the current goal ID, and returns them serialized as JSON in a text content response.
    case 'get_todos': {
      if (!this.currentGoal) {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InvalidRequest,
          'No active goal. Start a new planning session first.'
        );
      }
    
      const todos = await storage.getTodos(this.currentGoal.id);
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(todos, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:183-190 (registration)
    Tool registration in ListToolsRequestSchema response: defines name 'get_todos', description, and empty input schema (no parameters required).
    {
      name: 'get_todos',
      description: 'Get all todos in the current plan',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of Todo objects returned by the get_todos tool.
    export interface Todo {
      id: string;
      title: string;
      description: string;
      complexity: number;
      codeExample?: string;
      isComplete: boolean;
      createdAt: string;
      updatedAt: string;
    }
  • Storage helper method getTodos that retrieves the list of todos from the implementation plan associated with the given goal ID.
    async getTodos(goalId: string): Promise<Todo[]> {
      const plan = await this.getPlan(goalId);
      return plan?.todos || [];
    }
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. It states 'Get all todos' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, how it handles empty plans, or what the return format is. This is inadequate for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'current plan' means, how todos are returned, or any error conditions. For a tool that likely interacts with a planning system, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its full context.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it correctly doesn't mention any. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero parameters with full schema coverage.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('all todos in the current plan'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_todo_status' or 'save_plan', which might also involve todos, so it misses full sibling distinction.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a current plan), exclusions, or compare to siblings like 'add_todo' or 'remove_todo', leaving usage context unclear.

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/PhilippMT/Software-planning-mcp'

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