Skip to main content
Glama
yvanfreitas

MCP Test Server

by yvanfreitas

get_task

Retrieve a specific task by its unique ID to access task details and information within the MCP Test Server system.

Instructions

Get a specific task by ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTask ID

Implementation Reference

  • TaskService.getById implements the logic to retrieve a specific task by ID, matching the 'get_task' tool's purpose.
    static getById(id) {
      const task = tasks.find(t => t.id === id);
      
      if (!task) {
        return {
          success: false,
          message: 'Task not found'
        };
      }
    
      return {
        success: true,
        data: task
      };
    }
  • Defines the input schema for the 'get_task' tool, specifying required 'id' parameter.
    {
      name: 'get_task',
      description: 'Get a specific task by ID',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          id: {
            type: 'number',
            description: 'Task ID'
          }
        },
        required: ['id']
      }
    },
  • mcp-server.js:39-47 (registration)
    Registers the list of available tools, including taskToolSchemas which contains the 'get_task' schema.
      return {
        tools: [
          ...userToolSchemas,
          ...taskToolSchemas,
          searchToolSchema
        ]
      };
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers minimal insight. It doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation, what happens if the ID is invalid (e.g., error handling), or any rate limits or authentication requirements. The description is too brief to adequately inform an agent about behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, consisting of a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence ('Get a specific task by ID') contributes essential information, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient for a tool that retrieves data. It doesn't explain what information is returned (e.g., task details, status, metadata) or potential errors, leaving the agent with incomplete context for proper invocation and response handling. This is a significant gap for a data retrieval tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'id' parameter clearly documented as 'Task ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, as it only restates that the tool retrieves a task 'by ID' without elaborating on ID format or constraints. This meets the baseline score since the schema handles parameter documentation effectively.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('a specific task by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_tasks' (plural) by specifying retrieval of a single task. However, it doesn't explicitly mention what 'get' entails (e.g., fetching details vs. metadata), which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_tasks' (for listing multiple tasks) or 'search' (for finding tasks by criteria). It also doesn't mention prerequisites such as needing a valid task ID or whether the ID must exist in the system, leaving usage context unclear.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/yvanfreitas/MCP-test'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server