Skip to main content
Glama
olgasafonova

productplan-mcp-server

by olgasafonova
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

get_launch_tasks

Read-only

Fetch all tasks tied to a launch ID to display what needs to be done for that launch. Ideal for answering 'Show tasks' or 'What needs to be done?'

Instructions

Get all tasks for a launch.

USE WHEN: "Show tasks", "What needs to be done?" For one specific task, use get_launch_task. FAILS WHEN: launch_id not found.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
launch_idYesLaunch ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim
summaryYesHuman-readable summary of the result (e.g. "Found 3 roadmaps")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv6.0.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "description": "Human-readable summary of the result (e.g. \"Found 3 roadmaps\")",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "summary",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv5.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the failure condition (launch_id not found) and the collection-level scope, which is useful context. However, it doesn't disclose what happens on failure (error message? empty list?) or whether the response is ordered/paginated. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: the core purpose is in the first sentence, followed by structured USE WHEN and FAILS WHEN sections. Every sentence earns its place, and the formatting makes the guidance scannable for an agent.

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 simple read-only list tool with one parameter, an output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, usage context, alternative, and failure condition. The only minor gap is not describing the return format, but the output schema presumably handles that, so the description doesn't need to.

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% — the only parameter launch_id is documented in the schema as 'Launch ID'. The description doesn't add meaning beyond that, but it doesn't need to since the schema fully covers the single parameter. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get all tasks for a launch.' It clearly identifies the collection-level operation and distinguishes it from the sibling get_launch_task by noting the single-task alternative. It doesn't explicitly name the sibling in the main description, but the USE WHEN/FAILS WHEN structure provides enough differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: USE WHEN with example user queries ('Show tasks', 'What needs to be done?'), a clear alternative for a different case ('For one specific task, use get_launch_task'), and a failure condition ('FAILS WHEN: launch_id not found'). This is exactly the kind of when-to-use vs alternatives guidance that helps an agent select correctly.

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