Frostbyte

task_log_decision

Record a non-obvious decision in 1–2 short sentences: what and why. Omit the task title and introductory labels. Append-only; does not mutate task fields.

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>",
      "decision": "<decision>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "task_log_decision"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`reason`	No	Why, if not already in decision. Appended to it.
`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."
`decision`	Yes	1–2 sentences: what was decided and why.
`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 establish the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), and the description adds genuine context beyond them: the operation is append-only and leaves task fields untouched. It does not spell out that repeated calls create duplicate log entries (the practical consequence of idempotentHint=false), which would complete the picture.

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 compact sentences with zero filler: the action and content rule first, formatting exclusions second, and the append-only safety note last. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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 single-record logging tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description covers purpose, content format, and side-effect profile adequately. With no output schema, a brief note on what the call returns (or how decisions are later retrieved) is the only gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds content guidance for the decision text (what and why, 1–2 sentences, omit task title and labels) but is silent on the `reason` parameter, which the schema says is appended to `decision` — a relationship worth clarifying since it overlaps conceptually.

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?

"Record a non-obvious decision" gives a specific verb (record/log) and resource (decision), and "Append-only; does not mutate task fields" distinguishes it from the many mutating task_* siblings like update_task and task_edit_subtask. It would need an explicit named alternative to reach a 5.

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 phrase "non-obvious decision" functions as a clear activation criterion, and the content constraints (1–2 short sentences, what and why) tell the agent how to use it rather than just when. No exclusion cases or named sibling alternatives are given, so it falls short of a 5.

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?