Frostbyte

signals_link_task

Link a user signal to a task, marking it reviewed. Carries its public votes onto the task and counts it as evidence. Works on new, saved and already-reviewed signals, and can be called once per task when one signal leads to several. When reviewing a signal, propose the tasks it should become and wait for the user's approval; then create each with create_task (releaseId null unless they name a release) and link it here. The result says when to ask the user about showing the task on the public roadmap. 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>",
      "signalId": "<signalId>",
      "taskId": "<taskId>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "signals_link_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`taskId`	Yes	Task to link the signal to. The task ID or number (FB-360 or 360)
`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."
`signalId`	Yes	The signal ID
`projectId`	Yes	The project ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false) it discloses concrete mutation effects: the signal is marked reviewed, public votes transfer to the task, and the signal counts as evidence. It confirms the non-idempotent behavior spelled out in annotations by saying it can be called once per task, and adds an auth prerequisite ('Project membership required') that annotations do not carry.

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?

Purpose and side effects are front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by applicability, then workflow, then edge details. No filler, but the closing sentence about the roadmap prompt is tacked on and reads slightly disconnected from the linking mechanics.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, it covers side effects, allowed input states, call limits, workflow ordering, and auth requirements. The main gap is failure behavior — what happens if the signal is already linked to that task — which an agent would want before retrying.

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 all four parameters are already documented, including the taskId ID-or-number format. The description adds only light semantics beyond that (the per-task call limit, the membership requirement on projectId); it does not expand on signalId or the analytics-oriented context parameter. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The opening clause states a specific verb and resource ('Link a user signal to a task') plus the immediate side effect ('marking it reviewed'), which cleanly separates it from siblings like signals_unlink_task, signals_mark_reviewed, and signals_dismiss. Two further side effects (votes, evidence) round out what the call actually does.

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?

It names the triggering workflow ('When reviewing a signal, propose the tasks it should become and wait for the user's approval'), the prerequisite creation step with a specific sibling (create_task, with the releaseId null default), and the acceptable input states (new, saved, already-reviewed). It also notes the one-call-per-task constraint, so an agent knows how to handle a signal that maps to several tasks.

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?