Skip to main content
Glama
guifelix

MCP Todo.txt Integration

search-tasks

Find tasks in Todo.txt files by searching for specific text or keywords to locate relevant items quickly.

Instructions

Search for tasks containing a query string.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'search-tasks' tool. It loads all tasks, filters those whose string representation includes the provided query, and returns the matching tasks joined by newlines in a text content block.
    async ({ query }) => {
        const tasks = await loadTasks();
        const matchingTasks = tasks.filter(task => task.toString().includes(query));
        return {
            content: [
                { type: "text", text: matchingTasks.map(task => task.toString()).join("\n") },
            ],
        };
    }
  • The input schema for the 'search-tasks' tool, defining a required 'query' parameter as a Zod string schema.
    { query: z.string() },
  • src/tools.ts:150-163 (registration)
    The registration of the 'search-tasks' tool on the MCP server using server.tool(), including the tool name, description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool(
        "search-tasks",
        "Search for tasks containing a query string.",
        { query: z.string() },
        async ({ query }) => {
            const tasks = await loadTasks();
            const matchingTasks = tasks.filter(task => task.toString().includes(query));
            return {
                content: [
                    { type: "text", text: matchingTasks.map(task => task.toString()).join("\n") },
                ],
            };
        }
    );
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 of behavioral disclosure. It mentions searching but does not describe traits like whether it's read-only, how results are returned (e.g., pagination, sorting), error handling, or performance aspects. 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, clearly stating the core action without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 search operation with one parameter), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not address return values, error cases, or behavioral nuances, leaving the agent with insufficient information for reliable use.

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?

The input schema has one parameter ('query') with 0% description coverage, and the description does not add meaningful semantics beyond stating it's a 'query string.' It lacks details on format, constraints, or examples, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage and leaving the parameter poorly defined.

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 tool's purpose as 'Search for tasks containing a query string,' which is clear but vague. It specifies the verb ('search') and resource ('tasks'), but does not distinguish it from sibling tools like 'filter-tasks' or 'list-tasks,' leaving ambiguity about its unique scope or functionality.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools such as 'filter-tasks' and 'list-tasks' available, there is no indication of specific contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions for using 'search-tasks,' leaving the agent without usage direction.

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/guifelix/mcp-server-todotxt'

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