Done Bear

Get Workspace Context

get_context

Read-only

Get a snapshot of the current workspace: task counts per view, recent open tasks, and every project, label, team and member. This is the tool that answers what is in the workspace and resolves a project, label, team or member by name — there is no separate list tool for those. Use it for that, not as a warm-up before every turn.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`timezone`	No	IANA timezone used to resolve "today" for views and scheduling (e.g. Australia/Melbourne). Defaults to UTC, which misclassifies Today/Upcoming for users in other timezones, so always pass the user's timezone when known.
`workspace`	No	Workspace id, slug, or name
`tasks_limit`	No	Max recent open tasks to return
`projects_status`	No	Which projects to return	active

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`teams`	Yes
`today`	Yes	Today's date (YYYY-MM-DD) in the requested timezone (UTC when none given)
`labels`	Yes
`members`	Yes
`projects`	Yes
`taskCounts`	Yes
`viewCounts`	Yes
`recentTasks`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / projects_status

Added value: +{
+  "default": "active",
+  "description": "Which projects to return",
+  "enum": [
+    "active",
+    "done",
+    "archived",
+    "all"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / activeProjects

Removed value: -{
-  "items": {
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "properties": {
-      "id": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "key": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "name": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "targetDate": {
-        "anyOf": [
-          {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          {
-            "type": "null"
-          }
-        ]
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "id",
-      "key",
-      "name",
-      "targetDate"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / projects

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "key": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "status": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "targetDate": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "id",
+      "key",
+      "name",
+      "status",
+      "targetDate"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "activeProjects",
-  "labels",
-  "members",
-  "recentTasks",
-  "taskCounts",
-  "teams",
-  "today",
-  "viewCounts"
-]New value: +[
+  "labels",
+  "members",
+  "projects",
+  "recentTasks",
+  "taskCounts",
+  "teams",
+  "today",
+  "viewCounts"
+]

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it returns a composite snapshot and can resolve multiple entity types by name, and the warning 'not as a warm-up before every turn' hints at the cost of calling it unnecessarily.

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?

The description is compact at two sentences and front-loads the purpose before the usage guidance. The phrase 'answers what is in the workspace' is slightly redundant after the first sentence, but the rest of the second sentence earns its place by clarifying scope and misuse.

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?

Given the annotations covering read-only behavior, a fully documented input schema, and an output schema for return values, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns, when to use it, when not to use it, and why it is distinct from sibling tools.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters including defaults, enums, and the timezone caveat. The description adds only indirect context such as 'recent open tasks' and 'resolves by name,' but it does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get a snapshot of the current workspace' followed by the concrete contents: task counts per view, recent open tasks, and every project, label, team and member. It also differentiates itself from any separate list tool, so an agent knows exactly what this tool resolves.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says this is the tool for workspace discovery and resolving entities by name, notes there is no separate list tool, and instructs agents to use it for that purpose and not as a warm-up before every turn. This gives both a positive trigger and a clear exclusion.

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

All Done Bear tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map to clearly distinct resources and actions: task lifecycle verbs, sub-resource tools (attachment, checklist, comment), and search are easy to tell apart. The only mild overlaps are search vs task_list's built-in search parameter and get_context vs task_list for recent tasks, but the descriptions give enough guidance to avoid frequent misselection.

Naming Consistency3/5

Task operations consistently follow a task_verb pattern, but other tools use bare resource nouns (attachment, checklist, comment, project), plus get_context, guide, label_create, and search break the pattern further. The names are readable, but the convention is mixed rather than uniform.

Tool Count5/5

At 15 tools, the set sits at the upper end of the well-scoped range but each tool has a distinct responsibility: task lifecycle, search, sub-resources, project/label management, context, and guidance. None feel redundant, and the count matches the breadth of the task-management domain.

Completeness3/5

Core task workflows are well covered: create, read, update, complete, reopen, archive, list, and search, plus comments, checklists, and attachments. Notable gaps remain: labels only support creation, archived tasks have no explicit restore path, and projects cannot be deleted or archived.

Resources

Need Help?