Skip to main content
Glama

write_task

Create a new task file with YAML frontmatter and markdown body for team coordination. Place tasks in the project's inbox for the recipient to claim.

Instructions

Create a new task file (v3: _lifecycle/inbox/; v2: fcop/tasks/).

The library assigns a filename of the form TASK-YYYYMMDD-NNN-{SENDER}-to-{RECIPIENT}.md and writes a FCoP-compliant YAML frontmatter + markdown body. In a v3 project the task is placed in _lifecycle/inbox/ so the recipient can claim_task it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
senderYesSender role code (uppercase).
recipientYesRecipient role code (uppercase). May use the slot form ``ROLE.D1`` for per-slot targeting or ``TEAM`` for broadcast.
subjectYesOne-line subject written to the ``subject:`` frontmatter field.
bodyYesTask body in Markdown.
priorityNoFCoP priority. Accepts ``P0`` / ``P1`` / ``P2`` / ``P3`` (canonical) or the legacy aliases ``urgent`` / ``high`` / ``normal`` / ``low``. Default: ``P2``.P2
thread_keyNoOptional thread identifier for linking this task to an ongoing conversation.
referencesNoComma-separated task filenames this task refers back to (for ``references:`` frontmatter field).
risk_levelNoOperation risk level (per ADR-0024). One of ``low`` / ``medium`` / ``high`` / ``irreversible``. Default: ``medium``. ``high`` and ``irreversible`` will automatically require a ``needs_human`` review gate. Leave empty to accept the default (``medium``).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It covers file naming, version differences (v3 vs v2), placement in '_lifecycle/inbox/' for claiming, and that it writes YAML frontmatter + markdown. Missing details on overwriting behavior or error handling, but overall strong.

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 two paragraphs with essential details, no redundant sentences. It could be slightly more concise, but every sentence adds value (file naming, version logic, placement). Appropriate length for the complexity.

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?

Given 8 parameters, 4 required, an output schema exists, and no nested objects, the description covers the core behavior well. It explains file creation context but omits return value specifics (handled by output schema) and error cases. Nearly complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, except for the file naming convention which is not a parameter. Schema descriptions are already thorough.

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 'Create a new task file' and specifies the file naming convention, version-specific locations, and frontmatter structure. It uniquely identifies the resource and action, distinguishing itself from siblings like 'create_task' through detailed file creation behavior.

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?

The description implies usage in FCoP-compliant projects but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_task' or when not to use it. No exclusions or context for avoiding misuse are provided.

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/joinwell52-AI/FCoP'

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