@illodev/taiga-mcp

taiga_task_custom_attributes_get

Retrieve a specific custom attribute definition for a task by providing its ID. Use this to access task custom field metadata in Taiga.

Instructions

Get a custom attribute definition for task.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "taiga_task_custom_attributes_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Custom attribute ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states 'Get' which implies a read operation, but it discloses no additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, error handling, or the contents of the returned definition. This is minimal beyond the tool's name.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently states the action and resource, making it easy to parse at a glance.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple one-parameter getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description conveys the core purpose but lacks context about return format or usage relative to sibling tools. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps that could affect tool selection.

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?

The input schema fully documents the only parameter 'id' as 'Custom attribute ID' (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameter, simply referring to 'a custom attribute definition' without further elaboration.

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?

The description 'Get a custom attribute definition for task' uses a specific verb ('get'), identifies the resource ('custom attribute definition'), and scopes it to 'task'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like taiga_task_custom_attributes_list and from similar getters for other entity types (e.g., taiga_epic_custom_attributes_get).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use guidance is provided. The verb 'get' and the required 'id' parameter imply this is for retrieving a specific definition by ID, but the description does not mention when to choose this over alternatives such as taiga_task_custom_attributes_list or taiga_task_custom_attributes_values_get. Guidance is only implied, not stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server