Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Task Queue MCP

Task Queue MCP

by devops-riku
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Resume a task

resume_task

Resumes a paused or blocked task by moving it to In Progress. Supply the task number or ID to continue work.

Instructions

Resumes a paused task. A task blocked for a reason is resumed with move_task to In Progress.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "task": "<task>"
    },
    "name": "resume_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYesThe task: its number, e.g. TASK-000123, or its id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation/safety profile is covered. The description adds the state-transition semantics (paused → resumed) but never says what state the task lands in or what happens if it isn't paused, which matters for a mutation.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the exception case. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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?

For a one-parameter mutation with annotations and no output schema, this covers purpose and the key alternative. The only meaningful gap is the resulting task state after resume, which an agent would otherwise have to infer.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented as a task number or id. The description adds no further meaning about identifier format or resolution, so the schema does all the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Resumes a paused task") and implicitly pairs with the sibling pause_task. It does not name pause_task explicitly, but the state it acts on is unambiguous.

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?

Gives an explicit routing rule: a task blocked for a reason should be resumed via move_task to In Progress rather than this tool. That is real when-not guidance, though it doesn't clarify what counts as "paused" versus other inactive states.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools