Skip to main content
Glama
redis

Redis Cloud API MCP Server

Official
by redis

get-tasks

Retrieve active tasks for your Redis Cloud account via the Redis Cloud API MCP Server, enabling efficient management of Redis resources.

Instructions

Get the current tasks for the current Cloud Redis account

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the 'get-tasks' tool. It calls TasksService.getAllTasks() via executeApiCall and returns the formatted response using createToolResponse.
    "get-tasks": async () => {
      const tasks = await executeApiCall(
        () => TasksService.getAllTasks(),
        "Get all tasks",
      );
      return createToolResponse(tasks);
    },
  • The Tool definition (schema) for 'get-tasks', specifying name, description, and empty input schema.
    const GET_TASKS_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: "get-tasks",
      description: "Get the current tasks for the current Cloud Redis account",
      inputSchema: emptySchema,
    };
  • src/index.ts:49-56 (registration)
    Registration of TASKS_HANDLERS (including 'get-tasks' handler) into the global ALL_HANDLERS object, which is used by the MCP server to handle tool calls via server.setRequestHandler(CallToolRequestSchema).
    const ALL_HANDLERS = {
      ...ACCOUNT_HANDLERS,
      ...SUBSCRIPTIONS_ESSENTIALS_HANDLERS,
      ...SUBSCRIPTIONS_PRO_HANDLERS,
      ...TASKS_HANDLERS,
      ...DATABASES_PRO_HANDLERS,
      ...DATABASES_ESSENTIALS_HANDLERS,
    };
  • src/index.ts:40-47 (registration)
    Registration of TASKS_TOOLS (including 'get-tasks' tool schema) into the global ALL_TOOLS array, which is returned by the MCP server in response to ListToolsRequestSchema.
    const ALL_TOOLS = [
      ...ACCOUNT_TOOLS,
      ...SUBSCRIPTIONS_PRO_TOOLS,
      ...SUBSCRIPTIONS_ESSENTIALS_TOOLS,
      ...TASKS_TOOLS,
      ...DATABASES_PRO_TOOLS,
      ...DATABASES_ESSENTIALS_TOOLS,
    ];
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a read operation ('Get') but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, error conditions, or what 'current tasks' actually means (running tasks, recent tasks, all active tasks?). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes necessary scope information. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 a zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose adequately. However, it doesn't explain what format the tasks will be returned in, what fields they contain, or how 'current' is defined. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, more detail about the return value would be helpful for agent understanding.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though trivial since there are no parameters). The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist. It could theoretically mention that no filtering options are available, but the absence of parameters in the schema makes this adequate.

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 clearly states the action ('Get') and target resource ('current tasks'), and specifies the scope ('for the current Cloud Redis account'). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-task-by-id', but the scope clarification provides some distinction. The purpose is specific enough for an agent to understand what this tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-task-by-id' or 'get-essential-subscriptions'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, timing considerations, or any context for selecting this tool over similar siblings. The agent would need to infer usage patterns from tool names alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/redis/mcp-redis-cloud'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server