Skip to main content
Glama
spranab

Saga MCP

by spranab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

tracker_dashboard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a full project overview in one call: project, epics with task counts, stats, blocked and overdue tasks, recent activity, and notes. Scope to the active branch with branch='current'.

Instructions

Full project overview in one call: project, epics with task counts, stats, blocked and overdue tasks, recent activity and notes. Best first call when starting work. branch="current" scopes to the active git branch.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
branchNoScope to a git branch: "current" = active branch, "" = branch-agnostic only, omit = all.
project_idNoProject ID. Omit for a single-project database or when SAGA_PROJECT is set. Otherwise the first is used and the rest listed under other_projects.
include_archivedNoInclude archived epics and their tasks.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Previous value: -"Project ID. Omit if the database holds one project, or if SAGA_PROJECT is set. With several projects and neither, the first is used and the rest are listed under other_projects."New value: +"Project ID. Omit for a single-project database or when SAGA_PROJECT is set. Otherwise the first is used and the rest listed under other_projects."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.10.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / branch / description
      Previous value: -"Scope to a git branch. Pass \"current\" to auto-detect; pass empty string to restrict to branch-agnostic epics. Omit to include everything."New value: +"Scope to a git branch: \"current\" = active branch, \"\" = branch-agnostic only, omit = all."
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_archived
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Include archived epics and their tasks.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Previous value: -"Project ID (omit if only one project exists)"New value: +"Project ID. Omit if the database holds one project, or if SAGA_PROJECT is set. With several projects and neither, the first is used and the rest are listed under other_projects."
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Scope to a git branch. Pass \"current\" to auto-detect; pass empty string to restrict to branch-agnostic epics. Omit to include everything.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observedv1.5.3

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the aggregating behavior and the branch='current' scoping nuance, providing some extra context beyond annotations, though not deep behavioral detail.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: the first states the core purpose, the second gives usage context, and the third clarifies the branch parameter. Content is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description does a good job enumerating the returned components (project, epics, stats, blocked/overdue tasks, activity, notes). It covers the main branch scoping too. 'Stats' is slightly vague, but the tool's dashboard nature makes the return shape sufficiently understandable.

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 100%, so the description is not required to document parameters. The branch='current' note in the description mirrors the schema's own wording and adds no significant new semantics beyond what the schema already 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 states a specific verb and resource: "Full project overview in one call" and lists concrete contents (project, epics with task counts, stats, blocked/overdue tasks, activity, notes). This clearly distinguishes the dashboard from sibling tools like task_list or epic_list.

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?

Explicitly says "Best first call when starting work," which gives a clear usage context. It does not name specific alternative tools or exclusions, but for an overview dashboard this is acceptable guidance.

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