Skip to main content
Glama
tsvikas
by tsvikas

update_subtasks

Modify a task's subtasks by adding, completing, reopening, renaming, or removing them; requires full access.

Instructions

Add, complete, reopen, rename or remove subtasks of a task. Requires full access.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addNonew subtask titles, appended
removeNosubtask ids or titles to delete
renameNo{id or title: new title}
reopenNosubtask ids or titles to mark not done
task_idYes
completeNosubtask ids or titles to mark done

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
doneNo
frogNoEat the Frog: 1 frog, 2 baby, 3 monster
noteNo
typeNotask
titleYes
labelsNo
parentYespath like 'Work > Client A > Website', or 'Inbox'
do_dateNoDo date: the day it is scheduled for
done_atNo
due_dateNoDue date: hard deadline
end_dateNoEnd date: self-imposed target
priorityNolow, mid or high (projects)
subtasksNodone/total, e.g. '1/3'
trackingNotime tracking running now
parent_idNo
recurringNo
backburnerNo
created_atNo
depends_onNotitles of blocking items
importanceNo3 = P1 red, 2 = P2 orange, 1 = P3 yellow
open_tasksNo
start_dateNo
updated_atNo
review_dateNo
subprojectsNo
estimate_minNoDuration estimate in minutes
note_previewNo
other_fieldsNofields not modelled by the server
planned_weekNo
subtask_listNo
daily_sectionNo
planned_monthNo
first_scheduledNo
minutes_trackedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the required access level ('Requires full access') and that multiple mutation operations are supported, but does not explain side effects, irreversible removals, or conflict handling beyond the 'Requires full access' note.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose and operations; the second adds a critical prerequisite. Every word 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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, multiple operations) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main operations and the key access requirement. It could add a note about return behavior or error cases, but with the output schema present, this is largely sufficient.

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 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the operation names, which are already reflected in the parameter names and schema descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Add, complete, reopen, rename or remove') and resource ('subtasks of a task'), enumerating all mutation operations. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update_task or mark_done.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides some context ('subtasks of a task') and a prerequisite ('Requires full access'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_task or mark_done, nor 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.