Complete task
complete_taskComplete a task by specifying its ID to mark it as finished.
Instructions
Markerer en task som færdig ud fra id
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Id på den task, der skal markeres færdig |
complete_taskComplete a task by specifying its ID to mark it as finished.
Markerer en task som færdig ud fra id
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Id på den task, der skal markeres færdig |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the operation without disclosing side effects, error conditions (e.g., task not found or already completed), or permissions required. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though it could benefit from additional detail without becoming verbose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the low complexity (1 param, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral details. It is minimally adequate but not comprehensive.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Only one parameter (id) with 100% schema coverage. The description essentially restates the schema's 'description' field (Id på den task...), adding no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (mark as completed), the resource (task), and it uses the unique identifier (id). It is distinct from sibling tools like add_task (adds) and sample_next_work_session (samples).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or any conditions. The context from sibling names is not leveraged.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/krollchristensen/mcp-node-tasks-05-sampling'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server