Frostbyte

delete_task

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a task — requires confirm: true. Also closes its linked GitHub issue.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "taskId": "<taskId>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "delete_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`taskId`	Yes	The task ID or number (FB-360 or 360)
`confirm`	Yes	Must be true to confirm deletion
`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."
`projectId`	Yes	The project ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description still adds value beyond them by spelling out permanence and, critically, that the linked GitHub issue is closed as a side effect — an external consequence annotations cannot express. It stops short of saying what happens to subtasks or attachments.

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?

Two short clauses, front-loaded with the destructive nature and the confirm requirement, with no filler wording. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple 4-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, this covers the essentials: irreversibility, the confirm gate, and the GitHub side effect. The only meaningful gap is cascade behavior — whether child subtasks or attachments are removed with the task.

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 taskId, projectId, confirm, and context are all documented in the schema. The description's mention of confirm: true merely restates a const-constrained parameter and adds no new semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Permanently delete a task') and immediately names the consequential side effect on the linked GitHub issue. An agent can distinguish this from task_delete_subtask or task_complete 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 Guidelines3/5

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

It gives the precondition 'requires confirm: true', which is real invocation guidance, but offers no when-to-use versus when-not guidance and never points at alternatives such as task_complete or task_delete_subtask for narrower removals.

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

All Frostbyte tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?