Skip to main content
Glama
jhl8041

Dooray MCP Server

by jhl8041
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get-task

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves complete Dooray task details—including body content, attachments, workflow status, assignees, and metadata—from a task ID or task URL.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific task.

This tool retrieves complete details of a task including its full body content, attachments, workflow status, assignees, and all metadata.

URL Pattern Recognition - Two formats supported:

  1. Project-scoped URL: "https://nhnent.dooray.com/task/PROJECT_ID/TASK_ID"

  2. Task-only URL: "https://nhnent.dooray.com/project/tasks/TASK_ID"

IMPORTANT:

  • taskId is REQUIRED, projectId is OPTIONAL

  • The taskId is the unique identifier (ID) from the URL, NOT the sequential task number shown in the UI

  • You can fetch task details with just the taskId without knowing the projectId

  • When a specific task URL is provided, use this tool directly instead of calling get-project-list first

  • To find taskId from task descriptions, use get-task-list to search and get task IDs

Examples:

  • From URL pattern 1: {"taskId": "4206132384174602537", "projectId": "1769381697328002548"}

  • From URL pattern 2: {"taskId": "4206132384174602537"}

  • Just taskId: {"taskId": "789012345"}

  • With both IDs: {"taskId": "789012345", "projectId": "123456"}

Returns complete task information including:

  • Basic info: id, number, subject, taskNumber (PROJECT-CODE/NUMBER format)

  • Project: project object with id and code

  • Status: workflowClass (registered/working/closed), workflow (id and name), closed flag, priority

  • Dates: createdAt, updatedAt, dueDate, dueDateFlag

  • Content: body with mimeType (text/x-markdown or text/html) and content

  • Hierarchy: parent task information (id, number, subject) if this is a subtask

  • People: users object with from (creator), to (assignees), cc (watchers)

  • Organization: milestone (id, name), tags array (id, name)

  • Files: files array with attachments (id, name, size)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskIdYesTask ID (unique identifier, REQUIRED)
projectIdNoProject ID (optional, can be omitted)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds substantial behavioral value by detailing the full returned payload (workflow status, dates, body mimeType, hierarchy, people, tags, files). It does not describe failure behavior for an invalid or missing taskId, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded and sectioned with headers, but it is long and repetitive: the taskId-required and projectId-optional facts appear three times, and the trailing 'Just taskId' / 'With both IDs' examples duplicate the URL examples already given. Several sentences could be cut without losing information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return value and does so thoroughly. The remaining gap is error/edge behavior (what happens when the taskId does not exist or the caller lacks access), which is minor for a read-only tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds critical meaning beyond it: taskId is the URL's unique identifier, NOT the sequential task number shown in the UI, and it gives concrete URL-to-parameter extraction rules for both URL formats. This prevents a very likely misuse of passing the visible task number.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get detailed information about a specific task') and then enumerates exactly what is retrieved. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by name, telling the agent to use get-task-list to find task IDs and to skip get-project-list when a task URL is available.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states the selection condition ('When a specific task URL is provided, use this tool directly instead of calling get-project-list first') and routes the alternative case to get-task-list. It also clarifies that taskId alone is sufficient and projectId is optional, so there is no ambiguity about prerequisites.

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