Skip to main content
Glama
dantalan

baatjie-mcp-server

by dantalan

Create a Todo

baatjie_create_todo

Add a todo to the tanOS action plan with optional wave, track, and dependency (blocked_by) metadata for sequencing.

Instructions

Add a todo to the tanOS action plan, optionally with sequencing metadata.

Args:

  • title (string): Short imperative summary

  • detail (string, optional): Context, why it matters, what "done" looks like

  • category (string): Grouping label, e.g. 'security', 'legal', 'pricing' (default: 'general')

  • product (string): 'locare' | 'tanos' | 'sigschecore' | 'brand' | 'cross-cutting' (default: 'cross-cutting')

  • priority ('critical' | 'high' | 'medium' | 'low'): Default 'medium'

  • wave (number, optional): 0=today, 1=root, 2=near, 3=downstream, 4=later

  • track ('A' | 'B' | 'SPINE' | 'TODAY', optional): Which workstream owns it

  • blocked_by (string[], optional): Todo ids that must complete first

  • effort (string, optional): Rough size, e.g. '1 hour', '2-3 days'

  • actor (string): Who is creating it, for the audit trail

  • response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): Output format

Returns: { "ok": true, "todo": { "id","title",... }, "audit_logged": boolean }

Examples:

  • Quick capture -> title='Confirm iKhokha reversal path', priority='high'

  • Sequenced item -> title='Load the policy book', wave=2, track='SPINE', blocked_by=[''], effort='1 day'

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waveNo
actorNoWho is performing this write, recorded in tanOS audit_log (e.g. 'baatjie', 'marius-ai', 'deon-ai')mcp
titleYesShort imperative summary
trackNo
detailNoContext and definition of done
effortNo
productNocross-cutting
categoryNogeneral
priorityNomedium
blocked_byNoTodo ids that must be done first
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for human-readable, 'json' for machine-readablemarkdown
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations mark readOnly=false and idempotent=false, which aligns with 'Add a todo'; no contradiction. The description adds an audit trail requirement (actor) and explicitly declares the return shape including audit_logged, going beyond the structured fields. It stops short of noting duplicate behavior or permissions, but the core side effects are disclosed.

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 long but structured with Args/Returns/Examples and front-loads the one-sentence purpose. Each section earns its place given 11 parameters, with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Because there is no output schema, the Returns block is valuable and explicit. Combined with parameter semantics and two examples, the description fully equips an agent to invoke the tool for both simple and sequenced todos.

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?

Schema covers only about 45% of parameters with descriptions, so the description carries the load; it explains every parameter, including enums and defaults for product, priority, track, and wave mappings (0=today, 1=root, etc.). The examples also clarify blocked_by usage. This adds substantial semantics beyond the JSON schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening line 'Add a todo to the tanOS action plan' names a concrete verb and target resource, and the sibling list (list_todos, update_todo) confirms this is the creation tool. The mention of 'optionally with sequencing metadata' further distinguishes it from a plain insert.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Examples show when to use simple 'Quick capture' versus a 'Sequenced item' with wave/track/blocked_by, providing useful context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the create-vs-update distinction is clear from the sibling names.

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/dantalan/baatjie-mcp-server'

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