kanboard-mcp

delete_subtask

Delete a subtask permanently by providing subtask_id and confirm=true. This irreversible operation removes the subtask from Kanboard.

Instructions

Permanently delete a Kanboard subtask. DESTRUCTIVE and irreversible — requires explicit confirm: true. To mark a subtask done instead of deleting it, set status=2 via update_subtask. Returns { ok: true, subtask_id } on success.

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": {
      "subtask_id": "<subtask_id>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "delete_subtask"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`subtask_id`	Yes	Subtask id to permanently delete (required).
`confirm`	Yes	Must be exactly `true` to confirm permanent deletion.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses destructive and irreversible nature, explicit confirm requirement, and return format. Could mention potential errors or permissions, but sufficient for a simple delete.

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 sentences, front-loaded with action and destructiveness, followed by alternative and return value. No unnecessary words.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, description covers purpose, usage, and return. Lacks error cases (e.g., subtask not found) but overall complete for agent to use confidently.

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. Description adds minimal new info beyond schema, reiterating that confirm must be exactly true and subtask_id is required. No additional constraints or explanations.

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 specific verb 'delete' and resource 'subtask', clearly stating the action. It also distinguishes from sibling tool 'update_subtask' by mentioning an alternative for marking done.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (permanently delete) and when not to (mark done via update_subtask with status=2). Highlights requirement for confirm=true and irreversible nature.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.