Casefile

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Unlink tasks

unlink

Removes a link between two tasks by key and relationship kind; missing links are refused and closed-task parent/blocks links remain.

Instructions

Removes a link and files link_removed in both cases.

A link is removed from either side and under either name of its kind: blocks from TRK-1 to TRK-7 and blocked_by from TRK-7 to TRK-1 are the same link. On a closed task parent and blocks stay (task_closed), relates is removed. A link that does not exist is refused with link_not_found.

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": {
      "key": "<key>",
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "other": "<other>"
    },
    "name": "unlink"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	Yes	Task key `PROJECT-N`, case-insensitive; a previous key of a moved task addresses it as well. An unknown key is refused with `task_not_found`
`kind`	Yes	Role of the task `key` toward the task `other`: `link(key='TRK-1', kind='blocks', other='TRK-7')` means TRK-1 blocks TRK-7, and the card of TRK-7 shows the same link as `blocked_by`
`other`	Yes	Key of the task on the other side of the link

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	Yes
`entry`	Yes	Number of the `link_added` or `link_removed` entry in the case of `key`
`other_entry`	Yes	Number of the same entry in the case of `other`

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed17 schema fields changedv0.5.2Sep 25, 2026

removedInput schema / $defs

Removed value: -{
-  "LinkKind": {
-    "description": "Вид связи. Перечислены обе стороны каждой пары: клиент адресует любую из них.",
-    "enum": [
-      "parent",
-      "child",
-      "blocks",
-      "blocked_by",
-      "relates"
-    ],
-    "title": "LinkKind",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

changedInput schema / properties / key / description

Previous value: -"Ключ задачи, например `TRK-42`. Регистр не важен"New value: +"Task key `PROJECT-N`, case-insensitive; a previous key of a moved task addresses it as well. An unknown key is refused with `task_not_found`"

removedInput schema / properties / kind / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/$defs/LinkKind"
```

changedInput schema / properties / kind / description

Previous value: -"Кем приходится задача из `key` задаче из `other`, а не наоборот: `link(key='TRK-1', kind='blocks', other='TRK-7')` — это «TRK-1 блокирует TRK-7». В карточке TRK-7 та же связь показана как `blocked_by TRK-1`"New value: +"Role of the task `key` toward the task `other`: `link(key='TRK-1', kind='blocks', other='TRK-7')` means TRK-1 blocks TRK-7, and the card of TRK-7 shows the same link as `blocked_by`"

addedInput schema / properties / kind / enum

Added value: +[
+  "parent",
+  "child",
+  "blocks",
+  "blocked_by",
+  "relates"
+]

removedInput schema / properties / kind / examples
```
Removed value: -[
-  "blocked_by"
-]
```
addedInput schema / properties / kind / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedInput schema / properties / other / description

Previous value: -"Ключ задачи на другой стороне связи"New value: +"Key of the task on the other side of the link"

removedOutput schema / $defs

Removed value: -{
-  "LinkKind": {
-    "description": "Вид связи. Перечислены обе стороны каждой пары: клиент адресует любую из них.",
-    "enum": [
-      "parent",
-      "child",
-      "blocks",
-      "blocked_by",
-      "relates"
-    ],
-    "title": "LinkKind",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"Ответ `unlink`: какая связь снята и с какой стороны её назвали."New value: +"Entries filed by `link` or `unlink` on both sides of the link."

addedOutput schema / properties / entry

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Number of the `link_added` or `link_removed` entry in the case of `key`",
+  "title": "Entry",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / kind

Removed value: -{
-  "$ref": "#/$defs/LinkKind"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / other

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Other",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / other_entry

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Number of the same entry in the case of `other`",
+  "title": "Other Entry",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / removed

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Removed",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "key",
-  "kind",
-  "other",
-  "removed"
-]New value: +[
+  "key",
+  "entry",
+  "other_entry"
+]

changedOutput schema / title

Previous value: -"UnlinkView"New value: +"LinkFilingView"

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the safety profile (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false, openWorld=false); the description goes well beyond that, disclosing the emitted `link_removed`/`task_closed` events, the fact that removal is symmetric across side and kind alias, and the important edge case that `parent`/`blocks` are refused on closed tasks while `relates` is removed. These are exactly the mutation semantics an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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?

Front-loads the action in the first sentence, then layers exception behavior; backticked identifiers make it scannable and every sentence carries information. The phrase 'in both cases' is slightly opaque and requires the following sentence to resolve.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the description covers success, the alias/symmetry model, closed-task exceptions, and the `link_not_found` failure mode. It stops short of mentioning permissions or whether the removal is reversible, but is otherwise complete for a 3-parameter mutation.

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% and the kind enum plus `blocks`/`blocked_by` example are already documented in the schema, so the description's explanation of the `kind` alias is largely a restatement. It reinforces rather than extends parameter meaning, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (removes) plus resource (a link) and immediately names the audit event filed (`link_removed`), so the action and its side effect are unambiguous. It is clearly the inverse of the sibling `link` tool, so an agent can route between them without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied by the name; there is no explicit statement of when to unlink vs. when to use `link`, nor any prerequisite or exclusion to guide selection. It does supply operational context (symmetric removal, closed-task handling, link_not_found refusal) that helps an agent call it correctly, but this is behavior rather than use-case guidance.

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