Skip to main content
Glama

Create a to-do

create_todo

Add a new task to a Basecamp project to-do list by specifying project, list, content, and optional due date.

Instructions

Create a new to-do in the given list.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes
todolist_idYes
contentYes
descriptionNo
due_onNo

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'create_todo' tool that constructs a payload and makes a POST request to the Basecamp API using bcRequest to create a new todo item.
    async ({ project_id, todolist_id, content, description, due_on }) => {
      const payload: any = { content };
      if (description) payload.description = description;
      if (due_on) payload.due_on = due_on;
    
      const todo = await bcRequest<any>(
        "POST",
        `/buckets/${project_id}/todolists/${todolist_id}/todos.json`,
        payload
      );
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Created to-do ${todo.id} in list ${todolist_id}.`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Zod-based input schema defining parameters for the 'create_todo' tool: project_id, todolist_id, content, optional description and due_on (YYYY-MM-DD format).
    inputSchema: {
      project_id: z.number().int(),
      todolist_id: z.number().int(),
      content: z.string(),
      description: z.string().optional(),
      due_on: z
        .string()
        .regex(/^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$/)
        .optional(), // YYYY-MM-DD
    },
  • Direct registration of the 'create_todo' tool using server.registerTool, including schema and handler.
    server.registerTool(
      "create_todo",
      {
        title: "Create a to-do",
        description: "Create a new to-do in the given list.",
        inputSchema: {
          project_id: z.number().int(),
          todolist_id: z.number().int(),
          content: z.string(),
          description: z.string().optional(),
          due_on: z
            .string()
            .regex(/^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$/)
            .optional(), // YYYY-MM-DD
        },
      },
      async ({ project_id, todolist_id, content, description, due_on }) => {
        const payload: any = { content };
        if (description) payload.description = description;
        if (due_on) payload.due_on = due_on;
    
        const todo = await bcRequest<any>(
          "POST",
          `/buckets/${project_id}/todolists/${todolist_id}/todos.json`,
          payload
        );
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Created to-do ${todo.id} in list ${todolist_id}.`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    );
  • Invocation of registerTodoTools on the MCP server instance, which registers the 'create_todo' tool.
    registerTodoTools(server);
  • bcRequest utility function used in the create_todo handler to perform authenticated HTTP requests to the Basecamp API.
    export async function bcRequest<T = any>(
      method: string,
      path: string,
      body?: unknown,
      params?: Record<string, string | number | boolean>
    ): Promise<T> {
      const { data } = await bcRequestWithHeaders<T>(method, path, body, params);
      return data;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates a to-do, implying a write operation, but fails to mention critical aspects like required permissions, whether the creation is idempotent, error handling, or what the response might contain. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's 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 extremely concise and front-loaded, consisting of a single, direct sentence that states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the core action, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of a write operation with 5 parameters (3 required) and no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not address behavioral traits, parameter details, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond its basic purpose.

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%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. However, it only vaguely references 'the given list' without explaining parameters like 'project_id', 'todolist_id', 'content', 'description', or 'due_on'. This adds minimal value beyond the schema, failing to clarify parameter meanings or usage.

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 clearly states the action ('Create a new to-do') and the target resource ('in the given list'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'list_todolists' or 'get_todoset', which are read operations, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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 alternatives, such as whether it should be used for initial creation versus updates, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'list_todolists'. It lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions, offering only a basic statement of function.

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/craigashields/basecamp-mcp'

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