Group by Blocked Status

[kiranjholla]

I am trying to write an query which will display tasks grouped by whether they are blocked or not:

My query is something as below:

not done
(scheduled before tomorrow) OR (due today)
filter by function !task.file.tags.includes('#closed')
... other filter conditions ...
group by function \
    const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; \
    return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(1, 'Blocked') : label(0, 'Not Blocked'));
sort by priority
sort by created
hide created date

But this query doesn't work as expected for tasks that are blocked by tasks that aren't in the query.

For example, let's say we have a Task A which is blocked by Task B. If only Task A is included in this query but Task B is not, then though Task A is actually blocked, it will be grouped as 'Not Blocked'. If Task A and B are both included in the query, this grouping works fine.

Is there any way to check if the task is actually blocked or not without needing to send in an array of tasks to compare against?

[claremacrae]

Is the code really limited to only tasks that are in the query?

tl;dr No.

But this query doesn't work as expected for tasks that are blocked by tasks that aren't in the query.

I don't see how that could possibly be the case. query.allTasks is all the tasks that are in the vault (and match any global filter) - so cannot be affected by which tasks match the query.

See Values for Query Search Properties .

(With hindsight, adding that to query rather than creating a new symbol, might have been clearer, but I don't think it's feasible to change that now - it would be a breaking change or I would have to document and maintain duplicate symbols...)

What might be going on?

How does task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) work?

Looking at https://publish.obsidian.md/tasks/Scripting/Task+Properties#Values+for+Task+Dependencies

Takes us to:

https://publish.obsidian.md/tasks/Queries/Filters#Blocked+Tasks

I think the answer lies in the highlighted text in the image above.

Most likely "only direct dependencies are considered".

[kiranjholla]

Hi @claremacrae,

Thank you for taking the time to respond so promptly. And more importantly, thank you for such a fantastic plugin. I run my life thanks to this.

I am not really sure what to say to this though as I can easily reproduce the issue I have described.

Let's create an Obsidian note with the following structure:

# Obsidian Tasks Issue Illustration

## Tasks

### Blocked & Blocking
- [ ] I am the blocker 🆔 vg7lv8 ⏫ 📅 2026-07-31
- [ ] I am the blocked 🔼 📅 2026-08-31⛔ vg7lv8


### Other Sample Tasks
- [ ] Other Sample 1 ⏫ 📅 2026-07-30
- [ ] Other Sample 2 📅 2026-08-05 🔼





## Queries

### Excluding the Blocker
```tasks
not done
path includes {{ query.file.path }}
priority medium
group by function \
   const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; \
   return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(0, 'Blocked') : label(1, 'Not Blocked'));
```



### Including the Blocker
```tasks
not done
path includes {{ query.file.path }}
group by function \
   const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; \
   return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(0, 'Blocked') : label(1, 'Not Blocked'));
```

The above gives me this:

As can be seen in the above screenshot, the task I am the blocked is grouped as 'Not Blocked' in the first query, but 'Blocked' in the second query. The only difference between the two queries is that the second query includes the blocking task as well.

[claremacrae]

I have edited the sample text above to make it copyable as a whole block for the whole page (by surrounding it with two ~~~ lines).

[claremacrae]

I don't see that.

I see 'I am the blocked' in 'Blocked' heading in both searches:

[kiranjholla]

Off topic. I love the theme and the additional information you have on your view. Is there any write-up that can help me understand how to get that?

[claremacrae]

Hi, someone else asked me for that on Discord.
It's a bit of an untidy mess of CSS files that has evolved over years, so I haven't had the time to tidy it up and write it up.

[claremacrae]

Have you got any other tasks in your vault using the same id?

Please add this to the top of your test note, and then share the explain output here.

---
TQ_explain: true
---

[kiranjholla]

Here's the output:

### Excluding the Blocker
```
Explanation of the Query File Defaults (from properties/frontmatter in the query's file):

  No filters supplied. All tasks will match the query.

Explanation of this Tasks code block query:

  not done

  path includes {{ query.file.path }} =>
  path includes journal/2026/20260729 — Wednesday.md

  priority medium =>
    priority is medium

  group by function \
     const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; \
     return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(0, 'Blocked') : label(1, 'Not Blocked'));
   =>
  group by function const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(0, 'Blocked') : label(1, 'Not Blocked'));
  ```


### Including the Blocker
```
Explanation of the Query File Defaults (from properties/frontmatter in the query's file):

  No filters supplied. All tasks will match the query.

Explanation of this Tasks code block query:

  not done

  path includes {{ query.file.path }} =>
  path includes journal/2026/20260729 — Wednesday.md

  group by function \
     const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; \
     return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(0, 'Blocked') : label(1, 'Not Blocked'));
   =>
  group by function const label = (order, name) => `%%${order}%% ==${name}==`; return (task.isBlocked(query.allTasks) ? label(0, 'Blocked') : label(1, 'Not Blocked'));
Blocked
```

I am on the following versions:

• Obsidian: 1.12.7
• Tasks Plugin: 8.3.0

[claremacrae]

Thank you. I have no idea what's going on.

This has gone beyond the scope of Q&A territory now.

Feel to submit a (self-contained) bug report - by all means link here, but provide all the info in the bug report, so anyone working on the bug report just has to look in one place.