Skip to main content
Glama

list_tasks

View all tasks that will run when executing a specified Ansible playbook to understand the sequence of operations before deployment.

Instructions

List all tasks that would be executed by a playbook

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
playbookYes

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that runs 'ansible-playbook --list-tasks' to list tasks in the specified playbook.
    export async function listTasks(options: ListTasksOptions): Promise<string> {
      const playbookPath = validatePlaybookPath(options.playbook);
      
      // Build command with list-tasks option
      const command = `ansible-playbook ${playbookPath} --list-tasks`;
    
      try {
        // Execute command
        const { stdout, stderr } = await execAsync(command);
        return stdout || 'No tasks found in playbook';
      } catch (error) {
        // Handle exec error
        const execError = error as { stderr?: string; message: string };
        throw new AnsibleExecutionError(
          `Error listing tasks: ${execError.message}`,
          execError.stderr
        );
      }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters for the list_tasks tool (requires playbook path).
    export const ListTasksSchema = z.object({
      playbook: z.string().min(1, 'Playbook path is required'),
    });
    
    export type ListTasksOptions = z.infer<typeof ListTasksSchema>;
  • Registration of the 'list_tasks' tool in the MCP server, linking schema and handler.
    list_tasks: {
      description: 'List all tasks that would be executed by a playbook',
      schema: ListTasksSchema,
      handler: playbooks.listTasks,
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List all tasks') but doesn't describe what the output looks like, whether it's read-only, if there are rate limits, or any side effects. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's complexity (a single parameter with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return values, error conditions, or how the tasks are formatted, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'playbook' but doesn't explain what this parameter represents (e.g., a playbook name, ID, or file path), its format, or constraints. This adds minimal value beyond the schema's structure.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('tasks that would be executed by a playbook'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'run_playbook' or 'list_inventory', which would require more specific context about what distinguishes listing tasks from executing or inventory listing.

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 'run_playbook' or 'check_syntax'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether the playbook must exist or be valid, or any exclusions for when not to use it.

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

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/tarnover/mcp-sysoperator'

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