Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ClickUp API MCP

ClickUp API MCP

by alexfdez1010
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

clickup_write

Destructive

Execute authorized POST, PUT, PATCH, or DELETE requests for ClickUp API operations to create, update, delete, or upload workspace data such as tasks, comments, and attachments.

Instructions

Execute a catalog POST/PUT/PATCH/DELETE operation with user authorization.

        Inspect the schema first. Uploads use files [{field, filename, content_base64,
        content_type}]; maximum 10 MiB decoded total. For v2 attachments use field
        attachment[0], attachment[1], etc. Never automatically retry failed writes.
        Returns {status, data}.

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": {
      "operation_id": "<operation_id>"
    },
    "name": "clickup_write"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNo
filesNo
queryNo
path_paramsNo
operation_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent annotations, it adds meaningful behavioral context: it requires user authorization, defines upload file structure and a 10 MiB decoded limit, specifies v2 attachment field naming, and forbids automatic retries on failed writes. These details materially help an agent avoid dangerous or invalid behavior.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then layers in required preparation, upload constraints, retry policy, and return shape. Every sentence carries operational value and there is no padding.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The output schema covers return values and annotations cover safety hints, but for a generic write executor with 0% input-schema description coverage, the description does not explain how the agent should obtain operation_id or map body/query/path_params to the selected operation. The sibling tools for operation discovery are not referenced.

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 description coverage is 0% and there are five parameters. The description explains the files parameter in detail, including upload object shape and attachment field naming, but it leaves operation_id (the only required parameter), body, query, and path_params without semantic explanation.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Execute a catalog POST/PUT/PATCH/DELETE operation,' which clearly positions this as the write-side counterpart to clickup_read and the metadata siblings. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

It provides procedural guidance ('Inspect the schema first') and a usage constraint ('Never automatically retry failed writes'), but it never explicitly states when to choose this tool over clickup_read, clickup_search_operations, or clickup_get_operation.

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