dag-planner-mcp

get_blocked_tasks

Retrieve all tasks that are blocked in a specific run to identify dependencies preventing progress.

Instructions

Return all blocked tasks for a run.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "run_id": "<run_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_blocked_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`run_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and description only states the action without disclosing any behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, authentication, or what 'blocked' means). Minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff; efficient but could be slightly expanded with key context without losing conciseness.

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 simple tool with 1 param and no output schema, description omits return shape, error conditions, and what constitutes a blocked task, leaving the agent underinformed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, and description adds no extra meaning to the run_id parameter beyond its name. A 0% coverage baseline would require more compensation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action ('Return all'), resource ('blocked tasks'), and scope ('for a run'), differentiating from siblings like get_ready_tasks or list_tasks.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, but the context of run_id implies use for a specific run's blocked tasks; no when-not or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.