Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
taskpaper-mcp-server

taskpaper-mcp-server

by kekincai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List TaskPaper Projects

taskpaper_list_projects

List all projects within a TaskPaper file to organize and navigate your task structure.

Instructions

List projects in a TaskPaper file.

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": {
      "file": "<file>"
    },
    "name": "taskpaper_list_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as output format, scope of projects (all vs. top-level), or file handling (local path vs. content). Minimal disclosure.

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?

The description is very concise (one sentence), but it sacrifices necessary detail. It is not verbose, but the brevity leads to incompleteness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description should at least clarify the 'file' parameter and state the output type (e.g., list of project names). It fails to do so, leaving ambiguity.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the 'file' parameter beyond its schema definition. No added value for the agent to understand how to specify the file.

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 tool lists projects in a TaskPaper file with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like add_task or search_items, though does not explicitly mention them.

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 versus alternatives like read_file or search_items. No context for prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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