Frostbyte

task_edit_subtask

DestructiveIdempotent

Check, uncheck, or rewrite one subtask. Subtask ids come from get_task output.

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>",
      "subtaskId": "<subtaskId>",
      "action": "<action>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "task_edit_subtask"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	No	New subtask text (required for set-text)
`action`	Yes	What to do to the subtask
`taskId`	Yes	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."
`projectId`	Yes	The project ID
`subtaskId`	Yes	The subtask (checklist item) id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish a mutating, idempotent, destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds the single-subtask scope and the kinds of state changes available, but it does not explain the destructive aspect of replacing text or describe result and error behavior.

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 sentences front-load the supported operations and then provide the essential ID-discovery guidance. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary structural overhead.

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, flat mutation with complete schema documentation and safety annotations, the description provides enough information to select and invoke it correctly. Explicit sibling boundaries and a brief note about result or error behavior would improve completeness, especially because no output schema is supplied, but these omissions are not blocking.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the schema fully documents all six parameters, the description adds useful invocation semantics by directing the agent to get_task for the subtaskId. Its wording also maps naturally to the check, uncheck, and set-text actions, though it otherwise leaves parameter details to the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence provides three concrete actions and a clear resource, while "one subtask" establishes item-level scope. It does not explicitly distinguish the tool from task_delete_subtask, task_spawn_subtasks, or update_task, so sibling differentiation remains implicit.

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?

The enumerated actions make the intended use clear, and "Subtask ids come from get_task output" supplies a practical prerequisite for invocation. There is no explicit when-not guidance or alternative for deleting, creating, or otherwise managing subtasks.

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?