Skip to main content
Glama
daanno

Simplicate MCP Server

by daanno

get_task

Retrieve detailed task information from Simplicate business data by providing a specific task ID to access project details and task specifications.

Instructions

Get specific task by ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • Registration of the 'get_task' tool in the ListTools handler, including name, description, and input schema definition
      name: 'get_task',
      description: 'Get specific task by ID',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: { task_id: { type: 'string' } },
        required: ['task_id'],
      },
    },
  • Handler for the 'get_task' tool call: validates task_id parameter and delegates to SimplicateServiceExtended.getTaskById, returning JSON stringified response
    case 'get_task': {
      if (!toolArgs.task_id) throw new Error('task_id is required');
      const data = await this.simplicateService.getTaskById(toolArgs.task_id);
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }] };
  • Core helper method that performs the actual API call to retrieve a task by ID from Simplicate /projects/task/{taskId} endpoint
    async getTaskById(taskId: string): Promise<SimplicateTask> {
      const response = await this.client.get(`/projects/task/${taskId}`);
      return response.data;
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of a SimplicateTask object returned by getTaskById
    export interface SimplicateTask {
      id: string;
      title: string;
      description?: string;
      project?: { id: string; name: string };
      assignee?: { id: string; name: string };
      status: string;
      due_date?: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a read operation ('Get') but doesn't disclose permissions, rate limits, response format, or error handling. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient to inform safe and effective usage.

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 with no wasted words—a single phrase that directly states the tool's function. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema) but lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like response format, error cases, or usage context. For a read operation with zero structured metadata, more detail is needed to ensure reliable agent invocation.

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 but fails to do so. It mentions 'by ID' which hints at the 'task_id' parameter, but doesn't explain the parameter's format, constraints, or source (e.g., UUID, numeric). With 1 undocumented parameter, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('specific task by ID'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_tasks' (plural) by specifying retrieval of a single task. However, it doesn't explicitly mention what 'get' entails (e.g., fetch details, retrieve metadata), which prevents 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid task ID), contrast with 'get_tasks' for listing multiple tasks, or specify error conditions (e.g., invalid ID). This leaves the agent without context for tool selection.

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/daanno/simplicate-mcp'

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