Skip to main content
Glama
Wulnut

lark-agent

by Wulnut
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_task_options

Retrieve available options for a specified field (e.g., status, priority) to ensure valid selections. Use optional project and work item type parameters for accurate choices.

Instructions

获取字段的可用选项列表。

当你不确定某个字段有哪些可选值时，使用此工具查询。
这对于了解状态流转、优先级选项等非常有用。

Args:
    field_name: 字段名称，如 "status", "priority"。
    project: 项目标识符（可选）。可以是项目名称或 project_key。
            如不指定，则使用环境变量 FEISHU_PROJECT_KEY 配置的默认项目。
    work_item_type: 工作项类型名称（可选），如 "需求管理"、"Issue管理"、"项目管理" 等。
                   如不指定，默认使用项目中的第一个可用类型。
    user_key: (可选) 飞书用户标识符 (X-USER-KEY)，用于以特定用户身份进行操作。

Returns:
    JSON 格式的选项列表，格式为 {label: value}。
    失败时返回错误信息。

Examples:
    # 查看状态字段有哪些可选值（使用默认项目）
    get_task_options(field_name="status")

    # 查看优先级字段有哪些可选值
    get_task_options(field_name="priority")

    # 指定工作项类型查看选项
    get_task_options(field_name="status", project="Project Management", work_item_type="需求管理")

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNo
user_keyNo
field_nameYes
work_item_typeNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.2

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return format ('JSON 格式的选项列表，格式为 {label: value}'), failure behavior ('失败时返回错误信息'), and default behavior for optional parameters (default project via FEISHU_PROJECT_KEY, default first work item type). This goes beyond minimal transparency, though it could explicitly state that the operation is read-only.

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 well-structured with clear Args, Returns, and Examples sections, and the primary purpose is front-loaded. It is somewhat verbose due to multiple examples, but each part serves a purpose and the formatting aids quick scanning.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description covers all four parameters, explains defaults and optionality, provides three examples, and states the return/error behavior. With an output schema present and no nested objects, the tool description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly without additional context.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does thoroughly. The Args section explains each parameter's meaning, optionality, defaults, and examples (e.g., field_name as 'status'/'priority', project by name or key, work_item_type like '需求管理'). This adds substantial value beyond the bare schema.

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?

The description states a specific action: '获取字段的可用选项列表' (get the available option list for a field). It clearly identifies the resource (task field options) and provides usage examples for common fields like status and priority, making it easy to distinguish from sibling task-management tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly tells when to use the tool: '当你不确定某个字段有哪些可选值时，使用此工具查询', and clarifies that it's useful for understanding status transitions and priority options. It does not mention when not to use it or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a lookup tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools