Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SecondBrain MCP

SecondBrain MCP

by vladilenm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

extract_tasks

Extract open checkbox tasks from Obsidian vault notes. Optionally filter by folder or include completed tasks.

Instructions

Extract checkbox tasks (- [ ] / - [x]) from vault notes. Optionally scope to a folder. By default returns only open tasks.

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": "extract_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
folderNoScope to folder (e.g. "01_Projects" or "01_Projects/SimpleClaw")
include_completedNoInclude completed tasks (default: false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight; it does not disclose return format, read-only nature, or performance characteristics, only the default open-task filter.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core action and then add optional context; no wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given two simple parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but missing details on output format or limitations; overall sufficiently covers what the tool does.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description's mention of optional folder and default open tasks adds no value beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 (extract) and resource (checkbox tasks from vault notes), specifies the checkbox format, and distinguishes from sibling tools like extract_decisions.

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 tasks but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives; it only mentions optional folder scoping and default behavior.

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