microsoft-todo-mcp-server

by vexxhost

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Complete task

complete_task

Idempotent

Mark a task as completed in Microsoft To Do by specifying the list and task IDs.

Instructions

Mark a Microsoft To Do task as completed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "list_id": "<list_id>",
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "complete_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`list_id`	Yes
`task_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`due_date`	Yes
`created_at`	Yes
`importance`	Yes
`body_content`	Yes
`completed_at`	Yes
`body_content_type`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate idempotent (idempotentHint=true), non-destructive, and not read-only. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond 'mark as completed', such as behavior for already completed tasks or side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words, efficiently conveying the core function.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks context about required parameters, idempotency, or error handling. Given the complexity of task management and multiple sibling tools, it is insufficient.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters (list_id, task_id) or how to obtain them. It adds no meaning beyond the raw schema field names.

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 clearly states the action (Mark) and the resource (a Microsoft To Do task), with 'completed' specifying the state change. It differentiates from sibling tools like delete_task or update_task.

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?

The description implies usage for completing tasks but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like update_task or delete_task, nor mentions any preconditions.

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

Deploy Server