Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
COR MCP Server

COR MCP Server

by fxckcode
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

cor_update_task

Update specific fields of an existing task by providing the task ID and the data to modify.

Instructions

Update an existing task (partial update).

Args: task_id: The task ID data: Fields to update

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_id": "<task_id>",
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "cor_update_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
task_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'partial update', but does not mention merge/replace semantics, effect of empty data, authentication needs, or side effects. Very limited behavioral context.

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?

Description is very short, front-loading the purpose and then listing args. It is efficient but could benefit from slightly more detail without being verbose.

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 presence of nested objects and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the data parameter's structure, valid fields, or error handling. The output schema may cover return values, but overall context for constructing inputs is lacking.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists task_id and data with minimal explanation ('Fields to update'). The data object's allowed fields, structure, or constraints are not described, leaving the agent with insufficient guidance.

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?

Description clearly states 'Update an existing task (partial update)', which is a specific verb+resource combination. The phrase 'partial update' distinguishes it from a full replacement, and among siblings, it contrasts with create, delete, and specific update tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cor_sync_task_collaborators or cor_create_task. The description lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or context for choosing this over other update methods.

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