Skip to main content
Glama

list_tasks

Retrieve all tasks from the task management server to view current items and track progress.

Instructions

List all tasks

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Executes the list_tasks tool by checking if tasks exist, formatting a markdown list of all tasks with status indicators, and returning as TextContent.
    elif name == "list_tasks":
        if not tasks:
            return [
                types.TextContent(
                    type="text",
                    text="No tasks found. Add a task to get started!"
                )
            ]
        
        task_list = "📋 Task List:\n\n"
        for task_id, task in tasks.items():
            status = "✓" if task["completed"] else "○"
            task_list += f"{status} [{task_id}] {task['title']}\n"
            if task["description"]:
                task_list += f"   └─ {task['description']}\n"
        
        return [
            types.TextContent(
                type="text",
                text=task_list
            )
        ]
  • Registers the list_tasks tool in the @server.list_tools() handler, including name, description, and empty input schema.
    types.Tool(
        name="list_tasks",
        description="List all tasks",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {}
        }
    ),
  • Input schema for list_tasks tool: no required properties.
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {}
    }
Behavior1/5

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. 'List all tasks' gives minimal insight: it implies a read operation but doesn't cover critical aspects like pagination, sorting, rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output looks like (e.g., list format, fields included). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise with 'List all tasks'—a single, clear phrase that front-loads the core action. There's no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse for an AI agent.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a read operation tool. It doesn't explain behavioral traits (e.g., how results are returned), usage context, or output details. While the zero parameters simplify things, the overall context requires more guidance for effective tool selection and invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters, as it doesn't mislead or omit necessary details about inputs.

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 'List all tasks' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about scope (e.g., filtered vs. all tasks) and doesn't distinguish itself from potential sibling tools like 'search_tasks' or 'get_task' (though none exist here). It's adequate but vague about what 'all' entails.

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 siblings like 'add_task', 'complete_task', and 'delete_task', it's implied this is for reading tasks, but there's no explicit mention of use cases (e.g., 'use this to view tasks before modifying them') or exclusions (e.g., 'not for filtered searches'). This leaves the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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/gvbigdata/MCP-Github-Deployment'

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