Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
aparser-mcp

aparser-mcp

by izzipizzy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

Task state

task_state

Retrieve the current status and live stats for any parsing task using its task ID, including queries done and results count.

Instructions

Get a task's status and live stats (status, queriesDone, resultsCount, ...).

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_uid": "<task_uid>"
    },
    "name": "task_state"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_uidYesThe task id returned by add_task.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavior. It implies a read operation but does not disclose error handling, validity of task_uid, or whether stats are real-time. Minimal 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?

Single sentence with no extraneous words, effectively conveying the purpose. Very concise, though a bit more structure could list returned fields explicitly.

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?

Adequate for a simple state retrieval with one parameter and no output schema. Could mention that it is lightweight and intended for periodic polling, but not strictly required.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for task_uid. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'task's status and live stats', listing specific fields (status, queriesDone, resultsCount). It distinguishes from siblings like add_task (creation) and task_results (results).

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 vs alternatives such as wait_task or task_results. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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