Skip to main content
Glama
dantalan

baatjie-mcp-server

by dantalan

Update a Todo

baatjie_update_todo
DestructiveIdempotent

Update a todo by ID to change status, priority, wave, track, or dependencies. Marking a task done automatically unblocks dependent items and refreshes the next-actions queue.

Instructions

Change a todo's status or sequencing metadata by id.

Marking an item done automatically unblocks anything that listed it in blocked_by — the dependency graph is recomputed on read, so the next call to baatjie_next_actions will surface newly available work.

Args:

  • id (string, uuid): Todo id

  • status ('open' | 'in_progress' | 'done' | 'blocked', optional)

  • priority ('critical' | 'high' | 'medium' | 'low', optional)

  • wave (number, optional)

  • track ('A' | 'B' | 'SPINE' | 'TODAY', optional)

  • blocked_by (string[], optional): Replaces the existing blocker list

  • effort (string, optional)

  • detail (string, optional)

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

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

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

Examples:

  • Close an item -> id='', status='done'

  • Re-sequence -> id='', wave=1, track='SPINE'

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTodo id
waveNo
actorNoWho is performing this write, recorded in tanOS audit_log (e.g. 'baatjie', 'marius-ai', 'deon-ai')mcp
trackNo
detailNo
effortNo
statusNo
priorityNo
blocked_byNo
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?

The description discloses the automatic unblocking behavior and dependency graph recomputation, which goes beyond the annotations. It also clearly states that blocked_by replaces the existing blocker list. While destructiveHint is true, the description doesn't explicitly mention destructive aspects, but the provided context is valuable.

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 well-structured with a clear intro, Args list, Returns section, and examples. Every sentence contributes meaning, and the format is easy to parse.

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?

Given 10 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a detailed return shape and examples. It covers side effects (unblocking) and the audit trail, making the tool's behavior fully understandable. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the explicit Returns field.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With only 30% schema description coverage, the description compensates by listing all args with types and enriching key params like blocked_by ('Replaces the existing blocker list') and actor ('Who is writing, for the audit trail'). Some params like wave are merely listed without deeper meaning, but overall it adds significant value beyond the 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 description states 'Change a todo's status or sequencing metadata by id,' which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like baatjie_update (generic) and baatjie_create_todo by focusing on status/sequencing updates.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through the description and examples ('Close an item', 'Re-sequence'), but there are no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions. The note about dependency graph recomputation hints at a workflow but doesn't name alternative tools.

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