Casefile

by azimov777

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Create project

create_project

Creates a project in Casefile with a unique key and title to group tasks, plus an optional description.

Instructions

Creates a project with a key, a title and a description.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	Yes	Key of the new project: a Latin letter followed by 1–15 Latin letters or digits (`invalid_project_key` otherwise). It is stored upper-case, never changes and prefixes the key of every task of the project. A key already taken, in any case, is refused with `project_key_taken`
`title`	Yes	Project title
`description`	No	Short "what this is", up to 320 characters after trimming; a longer one is refused with `project_description_too_long`. It rides in the card of every task of the project
`idempotency_key`	No	Retry key chosen by the caller, e.g. a UUID. A repeat with the same key and the same arguments returns the first result and creates nothing; the same key with other arguments is refused with `idempotency_key_reused`. A key is bound to the caller's token and kept for 24 hours

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`key`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.5.2Sep 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description only needs to add mutation-specific context. It adds none: nothing about the project appearing in list_projects, key immutability, or the retry behavior that the idempotency_key parameter exists for. The single clause is essentially a restatement of the name.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity comes partly from omitting information the tool needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the input schema is unusually thorough. However, for a creation tool with zero annotation detail beyond safety flags, the description leaves the agent without any statement of side effects or post-creation state.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents key format, the 320-character description limit, and idempotency semantics in detail. The description names key/title/description but omits idempotency_key and adds no format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (creates) and resource (project) with the main fields it accepts, which separates it cleanly from create_task and update_project. It stops short of noting scope or how the new project relates to siblings like list_projects, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to create a project versus using update_project or archive_project, and no prerequisites or alternatives are mentioned. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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