Skip to main content
Glama
alexd73

PlanfixMCP

by alexd73

create_task

Creates a new task in Planfix. Set name, dates, assignees, priority, custom fields, and more to define the task details.

Instructions

Создать задачу

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoTask number. For create requests this field is usually omitted.
nameNoTask name.
filesNoExisting Planfix files attached to the task. Each item must contain an existing file id.
objectNoTask object. Specify an existing object by number.
parentNoParent task. Specify an existing task by number.
statusNoTask status. Specify an existing task status by id.
overdueNoWhether the task is marked as overdue.
projectNoProject where the task belongs. Specify an existing project by number.
assignerNoTask assigner. Specify an existing employee by number.
auditorsNoTask auditors. Specify employees or contacts in users and groups in groups. Employee/contact identifiers must be prefixed, for example user:5 or contact:92.
dateTimeNoTask creation date and time as TimePoint.
durationNoTask duration value. The unit is defined by durationUnit.
priorityNoTask priority. Use Urgent for urgent tasks and NotUrgent for regular priority tasks.
templateNoTask template. Specify an existing task template by number.
assigneesNoTask assignees. Specify employees or contacts in users and groups in groups. Employee/contact identifiers must be prefixed, for example user:5 or contact:92.
isDeletedNoWhether the task is deleted.
isSummaryNoWhether the task is a summary task.
processIdNoTask process id.
hasEndDateNoWhether the task has a due date.
descriptionNoTask description.
endDateTimeNoTask due date and time as TimePoint.
inFavoritesNoWhether the task is in favorites.
counterpartyNoTask counterparty. Specify an existing contact/company by number.
durationTypeNoHow duration is calculated: CalendarDays for calendar days or WorkerDays for working days.
durationUnitNoUnit for task duration: Minute, Hour, Day, Week, or Month.
hasStartDateNoWhether the task has a start date.
isSequentialNoWhether the task is marked as sequential, meaning it participates in a sequential task/subtask chain where the next task is activated after the previous one is completed or becomes inactive.
participantsNoTask participants. Specify employees or contacts in users and groups in groups. Employee/contact identifiers must be prefixed, for example user:5 or contact:92.
startDateTimeNoTask start date and time as TimePoint.
resultCheckingNoWhether the task requires mandatory result checking.
sourceObjectIdNoUnique identifier of the specific object in the third-party application or system.
closeToDeadLineNoWhether the task is close to its deadline.
customFieldDataNoCustom field values for the task. Each item contains a custom field id in field.id and its value.
delayedTillDateNoDate and time until which the task is delayed/postponed as TimePoint.
notAcceptedInTimeNoWhether the task was not accepted in time.
sourceDataVersionNoVersion of the object data in the third-party application or system.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
resultYes
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Create task' with no mention of permissions, side effects, required fields, or the fact that it creates a persistent record. This is a mutation tool with zero behavioral transparency.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short (two words) but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. A useful description for a tool with 36 parameters and no annotations would need at least a sentence or two explaining core behavior. The brevity here fails to convey essential information, so it is not an appropriate size.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Despite the complex schema (36 parameters, nested objects, enums) and the absence of annotations, the description provides no context about creation semantics, required fields, potential side effects, or how to determine success. The presence of an output schema does not excuse the lack of high-level context for this create operation. This is completely inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the 36 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema already provides thorough documentation for each field, including examples and enums. Thus the description does not need to compensate.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description "Создать задачу" simply restates the tool name 'create_task' in Russian, offering no additional specificity about what a task is in this context or how this operation differs from related tools like update_task or task_list. This is a tautology, not a purpose clarification.

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 the many sibling tools (e.g., update_task, task_list, create_project). There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations where this tool is preferred over alternatives. The absence of any usage direction results in a score of 2.

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/alexd73/PlanfixMCP'

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