Skip to main content
Glama
shinpr

Task Agents

by shinpr
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of ambiguity or confusion with other tools.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    With a single tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect; the name 'run_agent' is descriptive and follows a clear verb_noun pattern.

    Tool Count3/5

    A single tool is thin for a server named 'Task Agents' which implies multiple task types. While the tool itself is powerful, the count feels borderline for typical multi-step workflows.

    Completeness2/5

    The server lacks tools for status checking, result retrieval, or cancellation of agent executions. The single tool covers delegation but leaves obvious lifecycle gaps.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • 2 of 2 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 24 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions autonomous execution and context continuity via session_id, but lacks details on safety (e.g., what gets modified), error handling, or rate limits. The absence of annotations puts more burden on the description, which is only partially fulfilled.

    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 two sentences: the first provides purpose and examples, the second explains a key behavior (session_id reuse). It is front-loaded with important information and wastes no words.

    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?

    Given no output schema, the description covers the response metadata (session_id). It explains the core behavior and parameter usage. However, it could be more complete by mentioning error scenarios, timeouts, or concurrency implications, which are common for agent delegation tools.

    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?

    Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds value beyond the schema: it explains the `session_id` parameter's role in maintaining context continuity and how it is returned. It also clarifies the distinction between `prompt` (user request) and `agent` context. This extra context helps agents use parameters correctly.

    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 uses a specific verb ('Delegate') and resource ('multi-step, or specialized tasks to an autonomous agent'), and provides concrete examples (refactoring, fixing test failures, codebase analysis). It clearly distinguishes the tool's purpose as handling autonomous, multi-step tasks, even though no sibling tools are listed.

    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 description explicitly states when to use the tool (complex, multi-step, specialized tasks) and provides examples. It does not include explicit when-not-to-use statements or alternatives, but the context is clear enough without siblings.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

sub-agents-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

sub-agents-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

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/shinpr/sub-agents-mcp'

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