Google Workspace MCP Server - Control Gmail, Calendar, Docs, Sheets, Slides, Chat, Forms & Drive

List Tasks

list_tasks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all tasks from a specified Google Tasks list, with optional filters for due dates, completion status, and visibility settings.

Instructions

List all tasks in a specific task list.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`due_max`	No	Upper bound for due date (RFC 3339 timestamp).
`due_min`	No	Lower bound for due date (RFC 3339 timestamp).
`page_token`	No	Token for pagination.
`max_results`	No	Maximum number of tasks to return. (default: 20, max: 10000).
`show_hidden`	No	Whether to include hidden tasks (default: False).
`updated_min`	No	Lower bound for last modification time (RFC 3339 timestamp).
`show_deleted`	No	Whether to include deleted tasks (default: False).
`task_list_id`	Yes	The ID of the task list to retrieve tasks from.
`completed_max`	No	Upper bound for completion date (RFC 3339 timestamp).
`completed_min`	No	Lower bound for completion date (RFC 3339 timestamp).
`show_assigned`	No	Whether to include assigned tasks (default: False).
`show_completed`	No	Whether to include completed tasks (default: True). Note that show_hidden must also be true to show tasks completed in first party clients, such as the web UI and Google's mobile apps.
`user_google_email`	Yes	The user's Google email address. Required.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed12 schema fields changedv1.28.0Sep 24, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / completed_max / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / completed_max / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / completed_min / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / completed_min / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / due_max / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / due_max / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / due_min / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / due_min / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / page_token / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / page_token / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / updated_min / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / updated_min / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
Addedv1.0.1Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds only the scoping constraint of a specific task list and does not disclose additional behavioral details beyond what annotations provide.

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 front-loads the core operation and resource, and all parameter-level detail is appropriately delegated to the schema.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The input schema is fully self-documenting across 13 parameters, an output schema exists, and annotations cover safety and side effects. The description is sufficiently complete for correct invocation; the only missing piece is routing guidance, which is already penalized under usage_guidelines.

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%, with every parameter (due_min, due_max, page_token, show_hidden, etc.) already documented in the input schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a clear verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), and scopes the action to 'a specific task list', which differentiates it from related tools like list_task_lists and get_task. It is clear and accurate, though it does not explicitly name any sibling alternatives.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_task, list_task_lists, or manage_task. The one-line description implies a read/list use case, but it offers no explicit context, exclusions, or decision criteria.

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

Deploy Server