Lists deferred agent tasks from a workspace or repo Kanban board, excluding done items by default, so you can track work to do later.
List deferred agent tasks (Kanban) for a workspace/repo. Use for work to do later — not durable facts (use amem_remember for those). Default excludes done tasks.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | No | backlog | next | doing | blocked | done | |
| workspace | No | ||
| include_done | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose one real default: done tasks are excluded unless requested. However, it says nothing about result ordering, pagination/limits, or what a task record contains, and read-only status is only implied by the verb 'List'.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, zero filler, and the core purpose plus the default-behavior caveat are front-loaded before any elaboration.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema, no annotations, and only partial parameter coverage, so the description still leaves gaps around returned fields, ordering, and result size. It is adequate to select the tool but thin for calling it correctly on a workspace with many tasks.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is only 33%, so the description should compensate more than it does. It adds meaning for include_done by stating the default excludes done tasks, and implies workspace scoping, but the status parameter's semantics and the workspace format are left entirely to the bare schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List deferred agent tasks (Kanban) for a workspace/repo'. It also explicitly separates this tool's data domain from amem_remember, so an agent can tell it apart from the fact-storage sibling without opening the schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives a clear usage condition ('Use for work to do later') and names the alternative for the other case ('not durable facts (use amem_remember for those)'). It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over task_add/task_update/task_complete, but the list-vs-mutate distinction is largely self-evident.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.