Done Bear

Edit Task

task_edit

Idempotent

Update fields on one task (task) or on several at once (tasks, max 50). Only the provided fields are changed; omitted fields are left untouched. To remove a value, list the field in clear (e.g. clear: ["deadline"]). Notes replace the existing notes (no append). assignee assigns the task; clear it to unassign. add_labels and remove_labels change which labels are on it. Editing several tasks applies the same changes to every one of them and cannot be undone in one call, so confirm the list with the user first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`task`	No	Workspace-scoped task number, encoded as a string
`team`	No	Team id, key, or name
`when`	No	Move to a different GTD view
`clear`	No	Fields to remove a value from, e.g. ["deadline"]. Use this rather than sending an empty string.
`notes`	No	New description/notes (replaces existing)
`tasks`	No	Several workspace-scoped task numbers (max 50), instead of `task`. Confirm the list with the user first: one call changes every task in it.
`title`	No	New title
`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."
`project`	No	Project id, key, or name
`assignee`	No	Assign to a member (user id, name, or email)
`deadline`	No	Set due date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`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
`add_labels`	No	Labels to attach (each a label id, title, or id prefix). The label has to exist already — create one with label_create
`remove_labels`	No	Labels to detach (each a label id, title, or id prefix)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`tasks`	Yes	Every task the call changed, in the order it was given
`action`	Yes

Schema Changelog

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

Changed9 schema fields changedSep 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / add_labels

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Labels to attach (each a label id, title, or id prefix). The label has to exist already — create one with label_create",
+  "items": {
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / remove_labels

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Labels to detach (each a label id, title, or id prefix)",
+  "items": {
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / tasks

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Several workspace-scoped task numbers (max 50), instead of `task`. Confirm the list with the user first: one call changes every task in it.",
+  "items": {
+    "description": "Workspace-scoped task number, encoded as a string",
+    "pattern": "^[1-9]\\d*$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 50,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "task",
-  "context"
-]New value: +[
+  "context"
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / count

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / id

Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / number

Removed value: -{
-  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
-  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
-  "type": "integer"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / tasks

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Every task the call changed, in the order it was given",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "number": {
+        "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+        "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "title": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "id",
+      "number",
+      "title"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "action",
-  "id",
-  "number",
-  "ok"
-]New value: +[
+  "action",
+  "count",
+  "ok",
+  "tasks"
+]

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description richly discloses behavior beyond annotations: patch semantics ('Only the provided fields are changed; omitted fields are left untouched'), notes replacing rather than appending, assignee clearing, and batch irreversibility ('cannot be undone in one call'). None of this contradicts the idempotentHint or destructiveHint annotations.

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 paragraph is dense but every sentence earns its place: target scope, patch semantics, clearing, notes behavior, assignment, labels, and batch caution. The core operation is front-loaded with 'Update fields on one task...' and no filler or redundant re-statements of the tool name.

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 15 parameters, full schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It covers the essential behavioral semantics, batch limits, and user-confirmation requirement. The implied precondition that `task` or `tasks` must identify the targets is clear from the opening sentence.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful cross-parameter semantics: `clear` is the mechanism for removing values, `notes` replaces existing content, `assignee` can be cleared, and `add_labels`/`remove_labels` modify label membership. This goes beyond the individual schema property descriptions.

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?

States a concrete operation: 'Update fields on one task (`task`) or on several at once (`tasks`, max 50).' The verb-resource pairing is specific and clearly an edit/update tool versus siblings like task_add or task_done. It does not explicitly name or contrast sibling alternatives, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: partial field updates, clearing values via `clear`, replacing notes, assigning/unassigning, and modifying labels. It also gives an important usage condition for batch edits: 'confirm the list with the user first.' It does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or name sibling tools like task_done, so it lacks full alternative routing.

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?