Frostbyte

signals_capture

Capture a new user signal: feedback, a request, a bug someone mentioned, or what you noticed or learned (including call or interview notes). Use it when the user wants to remember input, not when they ask for a task (use create_task for that). It lands un-reviewed for the founder to triage and does NOT create a task. Project membership required.

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>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "type": "<type>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "signals_capture"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	Yes	The kind of signal
`title`	Yes	One-line summary of the signal
`areaId`	No	Area ID this signal relates to
`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
`description`	No	Fuller detail: what was said, context, impact. Markdown supported; long call or interview notes are fine.
`sourceLabel`	No	Reference: Interview, Phone call, Meeting or Other
`submitterName`	No	The external customer or person who reported it, if known. Capture attribution to the connected user is automatic.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 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=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the write-and-safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the record lands un-reviewed for founder triage and does NOT create a task, which sets expectations about downstream state. It stops short of describing duplicate handling or what identifier is returned.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core verb and resource, then routing guidance, then the outcome/permission caveat. No filler or restatement of annotations.

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 non-destructive write with a fully described 8-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, routing, side effects, and prerequisites. The only gap is that it never indicates what comes back (e.g., a signal ID or the created record), which would help an agent chain into signals_link_task or signals_get.

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% with 8 well-documented parameters including two enums, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description only lightly gestures at parameter use by mentioning 'call or interview notes' (implying description/sourceLabel) and adds nothing on required fields, title length, or the mandatory context string. 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 ('Capture a new user signal') and enumerates the substance it accepts: feedback, a request, a bug someone mentioned, or an observation/learning including call notes. It names the sibling it is not (create_task) so an agent can disambiguate without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('when the user wants to remember input') and when-not ('not when they ask for a task — use create_task for that'), plus the prerequisite 'Project membership required.' Covers the exclusion and the alternative by name, leaving little to inference.

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?