Skip to main content
Glama
its-dart

Dart MCP Server

by its-dart

get_task

Retrieve detailed task information including title, description, status, priority, and custom properties by providing the 12-character alphanumeric task ID in Dart MCP Server.

Instructions

Retrieve an existing task by its ID. Returns the task's information including title, description, status, priority, dates, custom properties, and more.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe 12-character alphanumeric ID of the task

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'get_task' tool. Validates the input ID using getIdValidated, fetches the task using TaskService.getTask(id), and returns the task as JSON text.
    case GET_TASK_TOOL.name: {
      const id = getIdValidated(args.id);
      const task = await TaskService.getTask(id);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(task, null, 2) }],
      };
    }
  • Defines the tool schema including name, description, and input schema that requires a task 'id' parameter with validation.
    export const GET_TASK_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: "get_task",
      description:
        "Retrieve an existing task by its ID. Returns the task's information including title, description, status, priority, dates, custom properties, and more.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          id: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The 12-character alphanumeric ID of the task",
            pattern: "^[a-zA-Z0-9]{12}$",
          },
        },
        required: ["id"],
      },
    };
  • index.ts:192-214 (registration)
    Registers the 'get_task' tool (GET_TASK_TOOL) in the TOOLS array, which is returned by ListToolsRequestSchema handler, making it available to MCP clients.
    const TOOLS = [
      // Config
      GET_CONFIG_TOOL,
      // Tasks
      CREATE_TASK_TOOL,
      LIST_TASKS_TOOL,
      GET_TASK_TOOL,
      UPDATE_TASK_TOOL,
      DELETE_TASK_TOOL,
      // Docs
      CREATE_DOC_TOOL,
      LIST_DOCS_TOOL,
      GET_DOC_TOOL,
      UPDATE_DOC_TOOL,
      DELETE_DOC_TOOL,
      // Comments
      ADD_TASK_COMMENT_TOOL,
      LIST_TASK_COMMENTS_TOOL,
      // Other
      GET_DARTBOARD_TOOL,
      GET_FOLDER_TOOL,
      GET_VIEW_TOOL,
    ];
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a retrieval operation and describes the return content, but lacks critical details: whether authentication is required, if there are rate limits, error handling for invalid IDs, or if the operation is idempotent. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 that front-loads the core purpose. It could be slightly more structured by separating retrieval details from return content, but it avoids redundancy and wastes no words.

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 retrieval tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers what the tool does and what it returns, but lacks behavioral context (e.g., permissions, errors) and usage guidance relative to siblings, leaving room for improvement.

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 has 100% description coverage, fully documenting the 'id' parameter with its format and requirement. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying the ID is for task retrieval, which the schema already covers. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'an existing task by its ID', specifying it returns task information. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_doc' or 'get_folder', which have similar retrieval patterns for different resources.

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 like 'list_tasks' (for browsing tasks) or 'get_doc' (for retrieving documents). It mentions retrieving by ID but doesn't clarify prerequisites or when this is the appropriate choice over other get_* tools.

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

Related 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/its-dart/dart-mcp-server'

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