Skip to main content
Glama

update_task

Modify existing Todoist tasks by updating content, due dates, priorities, labels, or descriptions to keep task management current and accurate.

Instructions

Update an existing task.

Args:
    task_id: The ID of the task to update
    content: Updated task content/title
    description: Updated task description
    labels: Updated list of label names
    priority: Updated priority from 1 (normal) to 4 (urgent)
    due_string: Updated human readable due date
    due_date: Updated ISO 8601 formatted due date

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYes
contentNo
descriptionNo
labelsNo
priorityNo
due_stringNo
due_dateNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler for 'update_task'. It validates inputs via type hints, constructs updates dictionary from provided parameters, calls the TodoistClient.update_task method, and returns a formatted success message with task details.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def update_task(
        task_id: str,
        content: Optional[str] = None,
        description: Optional[str] = None,
        labels: Optional[List[str]] = None,
        priority: Optional[int] = None,
        due_string: Optional[str] = None,
        due_date: Optional[str] = None
    ) -> str:
        """Update an existing task.
        
        Args:
            task_id: The ID of the task to update
            content: Updated task content/title
            description: Updated task description
            labels: Updated list of label names
            priority: Updated priority from 1 (normal) to 4 (urgent)
            due_string: Updated human readable due date
            due_date: Updated ISO 8601 formatted due date
        """
        _check_client()
        
        updates = {}
        if content is not None:
            updates["content"] = content
        if description is not None:
            updates["description"] = description
        if labels is not None:
            updates["labels"] = labels
        if priority is not None:
            updates["priority"] = priority
        if due_string is not None:
            updates["due_string"] = due_string
        if due_date is not None:
            updates["due_date"] = due_date
        
        task = await todoist_client.update_task(task_id, **updates)
        
        return (
            f"Task updated successfully!\n"
            f"ID: {task.id}\n"
            f"Title: {task.content}\n"
            f"URL: {task.url}"
        )
  • Helper method in TodoistClient that performs the HTTP POST request to Todoist's REST API to update the task with the given updates.
    async def update_task(self, task_id: str, **updates) -> TodoistTask:
        """Update an existing task."""
        data = await self._request("POST", f"/tasks/{task_id}", json=updates)
        return TodoistTask(**data)
  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the update_task function as an MCP tool with the name 'update_task' using FastMCP.
    @mcp.tool()
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. While 'update' implies mutation, the description doesn't address important behavioral aspects: what permissions are required, whether updates are atomic or partial, what happens when only some fields are provided, whether there are rate limits, or what the response format looks like. The description merely lists parameters without explaining 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured and appropriately sized. It begins with a clear purpose statement, then provides a parameter-by-parameter breakdown with helpful explanations. While efficient, it could be slightly more concise by grouping related parameters (like the two due date formats) or using bullet points instead of the 'Args:' format.

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?

Given that this is a mutation tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema present, the description is moderately complete. The parameter explanations are excellent, but the lack of behavioral context (permissions, atomicity, response format) is a significant gap. The presence of an output schema means the description doesn't need to explain return values, but it should address other behavioral aspects.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides excellent parameter semantics that go far beyond the input schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the schema only provides parameter names and types. The description adds crucial context: 'task_id' identifies which task to update, 'priority' ranges from 1 (normal) to 4 (urgent), 'due_string' is human readable while 'due_date' uses ISO 8601 format, and all other fields represent 'updated' versions of task attributes.

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 ('update') and resource ('an existing task'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'complete_task' or 'reopen_task' which also modify tasks, nor does it explain how this differs from 'create_task' which might share similar parameters.

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. With siblings like 'complete_task', 'reopen_task', and 'delete_task' that also modify task states, there's no indication of when partial updates via 'update_task' are appropriate versus using those other state-changing operations.

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/dan-bailey/todoist-mcp'

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