mcp-knowledge-base

by vishnu-vasan

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

list_tasks

Fetch tasks filtered by status, priority, or tag, ordered by priority and due date.

Instructions

List tasks with optional filters.

Args: status: Filter by status ("todo", "in_progress", or "done"). priority: Filter by priority ("low", "medium", "high", "urgent"). tag: Filter by a specific tag.

Returns: List of matching tasks ordered by priority then due date.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tag`	No
`status`	No
`priority`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral context. It discloses that results are ordered by priority then due date and that filters are optional. It does not explicitly state side effects (none expected) or error handling, but the ordering and filter behavior are valuable for a read-only list tool.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by clear, bullet-like parameter descriptions and a return summary. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The description explains the tool's purpose, filter options, and output ordering. It lacks explicit mention of pagination or exact-match behavior for tag, but given the presence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation, the description is sufficiently complete for a list tasks tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema provides only parameter names, but the description adds meaningful constraints: status and priority allowed values, and tag as a filter. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage and makes the parameters actionable.

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 'List tasks with optional filters,' which uses a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_notes or get_stats by naming the operation and object type.

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 retrieving multiple tasks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, leaving guidance at an implied level.

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

Deploy Server