Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
microsoft-todo-mcp-server

microsoft-todo-mcp-server

by vexxhost
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Update task list

update_task_list
Idempotent

Rename a Microsoft To Do task list by providing the list ID and a new name. Organize your lists with clear, updated titles.

Instructions

Update the display name of a Microsoft To Do task list.

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>",
      "display_name": "<display_name>"
    },
    "name": "update_task_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
list_idYes
display_nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
display_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds minimal extra behavioral context, only specifying that it updates the display name specifically.

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?

Single sentence with no filler words, directly stating the action and subject. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

For a simple update tool with output schema, the description adequately conveys the core functionality. It could mention that only the display name is updated, but it is 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 0%, but the description mentions 'display name' for the display_name parameter. However, list_id remains unexplained, providing only partial compensation.

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 the specific verb 'Update' and resource 'display name of a Microsoft To Do task list,' clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like create_task_list 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 Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_task_list, update_task) is provided. The description only states the action without context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools