Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archiware MCP

Archiware MCP

by mnott
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

find_tasks

Finds all backup plans and tasks whose directories contain a given substring, returning each plan's and task's enabled flag in one batched pass.

Instructions

Every backup plan and task whose directories contain the substring (case-insensitive), with the plan's and the task's enabled flag. One batched pass over all plans.

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": {
      "substring": "<substring>"
    },
    "name": "find_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
substringYesPart of a directory path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior beyond the schema: matching is case-insensitive, results include the enabled flag for both plan and task, and the scan is a single batched pass over all plans (a performance characteristic). It does not state read-only semantics explicitly, nor ordering, result limits, or what happens when nothing matches.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with what is matched and what is returned, then a single clause on the batched execution model. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: match semantics, returned fields, and scan strategy. Minor gaps remain around result ordering and whether 'directories' means plan folders only or also nested task paths.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented as 'Part of a directory path'. The description adds genuine meaning the schema lacks: the match is a case-insensitive substring against directories, not an exact path or prefix. That is a real semantic contribution over the schema baseline.

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 names a specific verb (find) and a specific resource (backup plans and tasks whose directories contain a substring), and it states the returned fields (plan and task enabled flags). It is clear enough to distinguish from a single-file lookup like find_file, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling 'plans' or 'find_file' tools.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the tool for locating plans/tasks by directory path fragment, and the phrase 'One batched pass over all plans' hints at preferring it over per-plan iteration. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as find_file or plans.

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