Skip to main content
Glama
dragosroua

addTaskManager MCP Server

by dragosroua

assess_edit_project

Edit project content in the Assess realm to update project details and names for task management using the ADD framework.

Instructions

Edit project content in Assess realm.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectRecordNameYesRecord name of the project to edit
projectNameNoUpdated project name

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:668-670 (registration)
    Dispatch and registration of the 'assess_edit_project' tool in the CallToolRequestSchema switch statement, calling the editProject handler.
    case 'assess_edit_project':
      this.validateArgs(args, ['projectRecordName']);
      return await this.editProject(args.projectRecordName, args.projectName);
  • Input schema definition for the 'assess_edit_project' tool, defining parameters projectRecordName (required) and projectName.
    name: 'assess_edit_project',
    description: 'Edit project content in Assess realm.',
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        projectRecordName: { type: 'string', description: 'Record name of the project to edit' },
        projectName: { type: 'string', description: 'Updated project name' }
      },
      required: ['projectRecordName']
    }
  • The core handler function implementing the tool logic. Currently a mock that simulates updating the project name and returns a formatted success message.
    private async editProject(projectRecordName: string, projectName: string) {
      // Mock project edit via CloudKit
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Project ${projectRecordName} updated with name: ${projectName}` }] };
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Edit' implies a mutation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether changes are reversible, error handling, or rate limits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it's front-loaded with minimal detail, which could benefit from more substance to improve clarity without sacrificing brevity.

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 complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, error cases, return values, and differentiation from siblings, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 already documents both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying editing of 'project content,' which loosely maps to the parameters but doesn't clarify semantics like format constraints or interactions between them.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the action ('Edit') and resource ('project content in Assess realm'), which is clear but vague. It doesn't specify what 'content' includes (e.g., name, description, status) or how it differs from siblings like 'assess_edit_idea' or 'assess_edit_task', leaving the purpose somewhat ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify if this is for updating project metadata versus other operations like archiving or moving realms, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an existing project record.

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