Skip to main content
Glama
prachwal

taskgate-mcp

by prachwal
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

task_add

Add draft or planned tasks, including subtasks under a parent, to a gated task registry. Specify a verification command and review profile to enforce evidence-based transitions.

Instructions

Add a draft/planned task or, with parent, a subtask (id . assigned when id is omitted; one level, phase and default profile come from the parent; the parent must be in_progress before a subtask can start, and cannot close while subtasks are open). profile picks a review/verification profile from taskgate.toml. Duplicate ids and closed phases are rejected. Only identities listed in 'planners' may add tasks; pass by explicitly.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
byYes
idNo
specNo
ownerNo
phaseNo
titleYes
parentNo
statusNo
dependsNo
profileNo
verification_cmdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / profile
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "title",
-  "verification_cmd",
-  "by"
-]New value: +[
+  "title",
+  "verification_cmd",
+  "by"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the behavioral burden and does so well: auto-assigned subtask ids in the form <parent>.<n>, inherited phase/default profile, the constraint that a parent cannot close while subtasks are open, and rejection of duplicate ids or closed phases. It also discloses the authorization requirement (only 'planners' identities) and that 'by' must be passed explicitly.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Core purpose and the subtask mode are front-loaded, and the parenthetical clauses each carry real constraints rather than filler. It is dense — a single long paragraph — but nearly every clause earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For an 11-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and only a readOnly hint, the description covers modes, inheritance, and authorization but omits the semantics of several required or structural parameters (verification_cmd, depends, spec, owner, status default). Adequate to call correctly in the common case, incomplete for the full schema.

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 0%, so the description must explain all 11 parameters, and it only meaningfully covers parent, id, profile, and by (plus implied status). Required fields like verification_cmd, and params like depends, spec, owner, and phase, are never explained, leaving a substantial gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a draft/planned task') and immediately names the two modes: standalone task or subtask via 'parent'. The add-vs-update-vs-move split against siblings is unambiguous from the verb alone.

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?

Gives clear conditions for the subtask path ('with parent', one level, parent must be in_progress before a subtask can start) and rejection rules (duplicate ids, closed phases). It stops short of naming sibling alternatives such as task_update for modifying an existing task, so it is context-rich but not fully routing.

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