Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Task Manager

Task Manager

by vshfrost
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

edit_task

Destructive

Update any task fields in a single call, sending only the values you want to change. Use 'none' to clear optional fields while keeping the title intact.

Instructions

Змінити БУДЬ-ЯКІ поля задачі за один виклик (універсальний редактор).

Передавай лише те, що змінюєш — порожнє поле означає «не чіпати».
title — короткий заголовок (≤50 символів) для канбану/календаря; єдине поле, яке
НЕ можна очистити через 'none' (він обовʼязковий).
Щоб ОЧИСТИТИ поле, передай 'none'. Значення: status = backlog|todo|blockers|in_progress|in_review|testing|done
(переходи: у todo — лише з testing, in_progress, in_review або blockers; backlog → todo через
MCP заборонено, це робить лише Влад на дашборді; у blockers — лише з backlog, todo або testing;
у in_progress — лише з todo; у in_review — лише з in_progress; у testing — лише з in_progress,
in_review або blockers; у backlog і done — звідки завгодно);
priority = asap|high|low; deadline = РРРР-ММ-ДД; energy = S|M|L; domains/links — через
кому/пробіл; project = слаг проєкту або 'global' (фізично переносить задачу між файлами).
text — ОДИН рядок (з переносом — помилка); plan — багаторядковий markdown-план задачі
(окремий файл, не рядок задачі; 'none' прибирає; його бачить get_task).

`links` — шлях нотатки, з якої виросла задача, напр. 'projects/task-manager/overview'.
Саме цим задача зшивається зі своїм контекстом, тож проставляй його завжди, коли задача
виросла з конкретної нотатки. Перехід у in_progress стереже WIP-ліміт (≤15).

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "edit_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
planNo
textNo
linksNo
titleNo
energyNo
statusNo
domainsNo
projectNo
deadlineNo
priorityNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint/readOnlyHint annotations, it discloses substantial behavior: per-status transition rules, a forbidden backlog→todo path, the WIP limit of 15 on in_progress, that project changes physically move the task between files, that text must be a single line, and that plan is a separate markdown file visible to get_task.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then organized field-by-field with a clear clearing rule. The parenthetical status-transition chain is dense but information-bearing; the text is long, though nearly every sentence supplies rule detail an agent needs.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive 11-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers validation, clearing semantics, side effects (file moves, WIP limit), and cross-tool visibility of plan. The only omission is what the call returns, which is minor.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage across 11 parameters, the description carries nearly the full burden and does so: allowed status/priority/energy values, deadline format, comma/space syntax for domains/links, the project slug or 'global', and the 'none' clearing sentinel. Only 'id' is left undocumented, which is self-evident as the sole required field.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('Змінити БУДЬ-ЯКІ поля задачі за один виклик') and frames the tool as a universal editor, which lets an agent distinguish it from narrow setters like set_deadline or set_priority without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It states the key operating rule ('pass only what you change — an empty field means don't touch'), how to clear a field ('none'), and a recommended habit (always set links when the task grew from a note). It never explicitly names when to prefer this over move_task or set_priority, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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