Skip to main content
Glama
dragosroua

addTaskManager MCP Server

by dragosroua

assess_create_task

Create new content editing tasks in Assess realm without contexts or dates. Supports task names, priorities, and optional project/collection linking.

Instructions

Create a new task in Assess realm (content editing, no contexts/dates).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskNameYesTask name/description (max 1000 chars)
startDateNoOptional start date (ISO format)
taskPriorityNoOptional task priority (1-5, default 3)
projectRecordNameNoOptional recordName of the parent project.
collectionRecordNameNoOptional recordName of the parent collection.

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:255-268 (registration)
    Tool registration and input schema definition in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler. Defines the tool name, description, and input schema for assess_create_task.
      name: 'assess_create_task',
      description: 'Create a new task in Assess realm (content editing, no contexts/dates).',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          taskName: { type: 'string', description: 'Task name/description (max 1000 chars)' },
          startDate: { type: 'string', format: 'date-time', description: 'Optional start date (ISO format)' },
          taskPriority: { type: 'integer', minimum: 1, maximum: 5, description: 'Optional task priority (1-5, default 3)'},
          projectRecordName: { type: 'string', description: 'Optional recordName of the parent project.' },
          collectionRecordName: { type: 'string', description: 'Optional recordName of the parent collection.' }
        },
        required: ['taskName']
      }
    },
  • src/index.ts:660-662 (registration)
    Tool dispatch/registration in the CallToolRequestSchema switch statement. Validates arguments and delegates to the createTask handler method.
      this.validateArgs(args, ['taskName']);
      return await this.createTask(args.taskName, args.startDate, args.taskPriority, args.projectRecordName, args.collectionRecordName);
    case 'assess_edit_task':
  • The main handler function that executes the tool logic. Constructs a ZenTaskticTask CloudKit record object for the Assess realm (realmId=1), generates UUIDs, sets timestamps and optional references, and returns a mock success response (production mode would integrate with CloudKitService).
    private async createTask(taskName: string, startDateISO?: string, taskPriority: number = 3, projectRecordName?: string, collectionRecordName?: string) {
      const now = Date.now();
      const taskRecordName = `task_ck_${uuidv4()}`;
      const task: ZenTaskticTask = {
        recordType: 'Task',
        recordName: taskRecordName,
        fields: {
          taskName: { value: taskName },
          realmId: { value: REALM_ASSESS_ID },
          uniqueId: { value: uuidv4() },
          startDate: { value: startDateISO ? new Date(startDateISO).getTime() : now },
          lastModified: { value: now },
          taskPriority: { value: taskPriority },
          ...(projectRecordName && { project: { value: { recordName: projectRecordName, action: 'NONE' } } }),
          ...(collectionRecordName && { collection: { value: { recordName: collectionRecordName, action: 'NONE' } } }),
        }
      };
      // Mock save: console.log('Mock CloudKit: Creating Task', task);
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Task "${taskName}" created in Assess realm with ID ${taskRecordName}.` }] };
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of a Task record for CloudKit/CoreData interoperability, used directly in the createTask handler to build the task object.
    export interface ZenTaskticTask {
      recordName?: string; // CloudKit record name (UUID string, typically)
      recordType: 'Task';
      fields: {
        taskName: { value: string }; // Max 1000 chars, combines original title & body
        realmId: { value: number }; // 1 (Assess), 2 (Decide), 3 (Do)
        uniqueId: { value: string }; // UUID string, primary key in CoreData model
        
        // Core Data model fields
        taskId?: { value: number }; // Integer 16, default 0
        contextId?: { value: number }; // Integer 16, default 0 (legacy field)
        taskAudioRecordId?: { value: number }; // Integer 16, default 0
        taskPictureId?: { value: number }; // Integer 16, default 0
        orderInParent?: { value: number }; // Integer 16, default 0
        taskPriority?: { value: number }; // Integer 16, 1-5, default 3
        
        // References (relationships in Core Data)
        context?: { value: CKReference }; // Reference to a Contexts record
        projects?: { value: CKReference }; // Reference to a Projects record (renamed from project)
        collection?: { value: CKReference }; // Reference to a Collections record
        ideas?: { value: CKReference }; // Reference to an Ideas record (if task derived from idea)
        realms?: { value: CKReference }; // Reference to Realms record
        
        // Dates
        startDate?: { value: number }; // Timestamp (milliseconds since epoch)
        endDate?: { value: number }; // Timestamp (due date, or completion date)
        lastModified: { value: number }; // Timestamp
        
        // Task-specific fields
        localNotification?: { value: string }; // Alert date/trigger (max 100 chars)
        taskParentId?: { value: string }; // UUID string of parent Task/Project/Idea
        taskParentType?: { value: string }; // 'Task', 'Project', 'Idea'
        
        // removed isCompleted, completion handled by setting endDate & potentially realm
      };
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers limited behavioral insight. It mentions 'content editing' and 'no contexts/dates', which adds some context about constraints, but fails to disclose critical traits like required permissions, mutation effects (e.g., whether it's idempotent), error handling, or response format. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste—it states the action, domain, and key constraint clearly. It's appropriately front-loaded and concise, making every word count without unnecessary elaboration.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (a creation operation with 5 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like permissions, side effects, or return values, and while schema covers parameters, the overall context for safe and effective use is insufficient.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond implying 'no contexts/dates' (which relates to startDate but isn't detailed). It doesn't explain relationships between parameters like projectRecordName and collectionRecordName, so it meets the baseline 3 without adding significant value.

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 action ('Create a new task') and the domain ('in Assess realm'), with a specific scope limitation ('content editing, no contexts/dates'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'assess_create_project' or 'assess_create_idea' by focusing on tasks, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'assess_edit_task' or 'assess_add_task_to_project' beyond the creation aspect.

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 minimal guidance with 'content editing, no contexts/dates', hinting at when not to use it for contexts/dates, but lacks explicit when-to-use scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives. It doesn't clarify when to choose this over siblings like 'assess_add_task_to_idea' or 'assess_create_project', leaving usage ambiguous.

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/dragosroua/addtaskmanager-mcp-server'

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