Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
project-manager

project-manager

by samrullo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

pm_create_task

Create a new task by providing a project ID, title, and short name. Optionally add extra fields to define the task details.

Instructions

POST /tasks — TaskCreate (project_id, title, short_name, plus optional fields).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "payload": "<payload>"
    },
    "name": "pm_create_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
payloadYes
x_user_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions HTTP method and fields, but does not state idempotency, side effects, authorization needs, or return value behavior (though output schema exists).

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?

The description is concise at one sentence, but lacks front-loading of the most critical info. Including the HTTP method is partially redundant.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of a creation tool with a nested payload object and output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain payload structure, required vs optional fields, or tie to the output.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description partially compensates by listing project_id, title, short_name plus optional fields. However, it does not specify types, constraints, or whether these are required, leaving ambiguity.

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 "POST /tasks — TaskCreate" which implies creating a task, and lists specific fields (project_id, title, short_name). However, it lacks an explicit verb like "Creates a new task" and could be clearer in purpose.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like pm_create_comment or pm_create_project. The description does not mention prerequisites, relationships, or selection criteria.

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