no_human
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| task_addA | Create a no_human task via POST /api/tasks (source="mcp"). Returns compact JSON {"task_id": str, "source": str} — source is whatever the server actually stored (the "mcp" source is first-class, see module docstring). |
| task_statusA | Fetch a task's full current state via GET /api/tasks. Resolves by task id (or unique id prefix) first; if that 404s, falls back to matching external_id across the task list (GET /api/tasks does not index by external_id, so this is a client-side scan). Returns the complete task object as compact JSON. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
task_add creates a task while task_status retrieves the current state of a task; their purposes are entirely distinct with no overlap. An agent would not confuse which tool to call.
Both tools share a consistent task_ prefix and use snake_case, so they form an obvious family. The minor deviation is that one second token is a verb (add) while the other is a noun (status), but at only two tools this is easy to parse.
Two tools is on the thin side for a task-management server, though the narrow create-and-check scope keeps it acceptable. It falls in the borderline range rather than feeling egregiously over- or under-built.
The domain appears to be task management, and the server supports creation plus status lookup, which covers the core add-and-monitor workflow. Missing operations include list, update, cancel/delete, and resubmission, which are notable but work-around-able for a minimal no_human API.