ticktick-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

ticktick_create_task

Add a task to TickTick with title, project, due date, reminders, priority, and recurrence. Supports markdown content and subtasks.

Instructions

Create a new task.

Args: title (str): Task title. Required. project_id (str, optional): Project ID or name. Defaults to inbox. Accepts the project's name as well as its ID (case-insensitive, trimmed; "Inbox" resolves to the inbox). Two projects sharing a name is an error, not a guess. content (str, optional): Long-form content (markdown supported). desc (str, optional): Short description / checklist subtitle. all_day (bool, optional): True for all-day tasks. start_date (str, optional): ISO 8601 start datetime, e.g. "2026-04-13T09:00:00+01:00". due_date (str, optional): ISO 8601 due datetime. expected_day_of_week (str, optional): English weekday name. Required when due_date is set; mismatch returns an error. time_zone (str, optional): IANA timezone. Defaults to the system timezone for date conversion. reminders (list[str], optional): TickTick trigger strings, e.g. ["TRIGGER:-PT30M"]. repeat (str, optional): Recurrence rule (RFC 5545 RRULE). priority (int, optional): 0=None, 1=Low, 3=Medium, 5=High. sort_order (int, optional): Position within project. items (list[dict], optional): Subtask items.

Returns: JSON object containing the created task. _verification_warnings carries everything worth knowing about what landed: a response that did not match what was sent, a due date that is missing and so will fire no reminder at all or all-day and so no timed one, a title character TickTick parses as a marker, and content longer than the compact preview. On failure: {"error": "...", "status": "error"}.

Limitations: - builder() in ticktick-py sometimes omits dates, reminders, priority and timezone; we re-populate them after the call.

Agent Usage Guide: - Always pair due_date with expected_day_of_week. - Pass a project name directly, or list ids with ticktick_get_all(search="projects").

Example: ticktick_create_task( title="Replace kitchen tap washer", project_id="", due_date="2026-06-01T20:45:00+01:00", expected_day_of_week="Monday", time_zone="Europe/London", priority=3, )

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`desc`	No
`items`	No
`title`	Yes
`repeat`	No
`all_day`	No
`content`	No
`due_date`	No
`priority`	No
`reminders`	No
`time_zone`	No
`project_id`	No
`sort_order`	No
`start_date`	No
`expected_day_of_week`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral burden and does so richly. It discloses the builder() limitation that can omit fields and the re-population behavior, explains the _verification_warnings return mechanism, and describes failure responses, giving the agent a strong model of what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 long but every section earns its place for a 14-parameter creation tool. It is organized into Args, Returns, Limitations, Agent Usage Guide, and Example, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and details logically grouped.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's high complexity, zero annotations, and 14 parameters, the description covers all required invocation knowledge: parameter semantics, constraints, return shape, failure format, known limitations, and a realistic example. Nothing essential for correct use is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate entirely for the bare input schema. It does: every parameter is explained with types, defaults, formats, and constraints, including priority value mapping, RRULE syntax, reminder trigger strings, timezone defaults, and the expected_day_of_week requirement. This is far beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Create a new task,' a specific verb and resource that clearly identifies the operation. It is unambiguously distinct from sibling tools like ticktick_update_task, ticktick_complete_task, and ticktick_delete_tasks, and the detailed parameter list reinforces the creation scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The Agent Usage Guide provides concrete invocation guidance, including the mandatory pairing of due_date with expected_day_of_week and how to resolve project_id via ticktick_get_all. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives, but the creation-specific purpose makes the primary usage context clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server