Frostbyte

signals_unlink_task

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a task from a signal's resulting tasks, taking back the votes and evidence the link added. The signal stays where it is. 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_unlink_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`taskId`	Yes	Linked task to remove. 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, which already mark this as destructive and idempotent, the description discloses exactly what side effect occurs: "taking back the votes and evidence the link added." It also clarifies that the signal itself is not removed and adds an authorization prerequisite, which is meaningful behavioral context.

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 description is three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and side effect. Every sentence contributes useful information: the operation, the retained signal, and the membership requirement.

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?

For a four-parameter destructive mutation with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, side effects, scope, and prerequisites. No output schema exists, so no return-value explanation is expected, and nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 in the input schema. The description does not add parameter-level meaning such as ID formats or the required context text, so it meets the baseline for a fully documented schema without exceeding it.

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 description uses a specific verb and resource: "Remove a task from a signal's resulting tasks." It also clarifies the scope by saying "The signal stays where it is," which distinguishes this from deleting the signal itself and implicitly from the inverse linking operation.

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?

It gives a clear condition for use: removing a task that was linked to a signal, and states the prerequisite "Project membership required." It does not explicitly name the sibling tool signals_link_task as the inverse alternative, so there is some room for improvement.

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?