lmstudio

LM Studio: task status

task_status

Read-only

Check a specific background task by ID for progress, partial answer, tool calls, or final result; without an ID, list recent tasks. Optionally wait up to a set time for completion.

Instructions

Without task_id: list recent tasks. With task_id: progress of a running task (phase, answer so far, tool calls) or the full result of a finished one. wait_seconds waits up to that long for the task to finish before answering.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "task_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_id`	No	Task id from task_start or task_status.
`wait_seconds`	No	Wait up to this many seconds for the task to finish.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds substantive behavior beyond that — the blocking semantics of wait_seconds (waits up to that long for completion before answering) and the shape of what comes back in each mode (phase, answer so far, tool calls, or full result). It does not mention failure/error states or what happens when the wait times out, which keeps it at 4.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the conditional that determines behavior, with no filler or restatement of the name. Every clause carries a distinct fact.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With only two optional params and no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by naming the fields returned in each mode. Minor gaps remain around list size/recency window for the no-argument case and timeout behavior, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline would be 3, but the description adds meaning the schema cannot: task_id acts as a mode switch (omitting it lists tasks; supplying it targets one task), and wait_seconds is framed as a pre-answer wait rather than a filter. This is genuine semantics beyond the field descriptions.

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?

States the resource (task) and splits behavior by the presence of task_id: listing recent tasks versus reporting progress/result. The verb-and-mode framing lets an agent tell immediately whether it needs this tool or a sibling like task_start or task_cancel.

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?

The 'without task_id / with task_id' structure gives explicit conditions for each usage mode, and the wait_seconds sentence clarifies the polling contract. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when to prefer this over, say, checking server_status, so it earns 4 rather than 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.