Skip to main content
Glama
fenbs-ai

fenbs-mcp

Official

fenbs_update_item

Update an existing task by ref, changing only supplied fields such as lane, plan, size, links, and test status or notes.

Instructions

Change a task by ref. Only the fields passed change. Moving between lanes needs permission to move tasks; changing the content needs permission to edit tasks. Keep the plan current as you learn: pass the whole plan, rewritten -- it replaces the old one. Link or unlink related tasks with relatesTo and unrelate; the links already there are kept. When you finish, set testStatus and testNotes: how it was tested, and what was not. size is xs to xl (xl means split it).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYes
kindNo
laneNoThe lane, by its key. People see backlog as To Do, next as Next Up, doing as In Progress and done as Completed: use those names when you talk to people.
noteNoThe Problem box: what is wrong or missing, why it matters, and where -- file and line for code; repro steps for a bug. Written once; the fix goes in plan, not here.
planNoThe Plan box: how it will be done -- the steps, the files to change, the traps, and how it will be checked. Leave it out until somebody knows; do not put a PLAN heading in the note instead. Replaces the whole plan; "" clears it.
sizeNoHow big: xs (under an hour), s (an afternoon), m (a day or two), l (about a week), xl (too big -- split it). "none" takes a size off.
titleNo
projectNoThe project this belongs to, by name -- for software, usually the repository or app. A new name creates the project; case is ignored when matching, so reuse the names fenbs_list_boards shows.
categoryNoAn optional second grouping, by name, e.g. "Checkout" or "Mobile". A new name creates it.
priorityNo1 is most urgent. 1-2 High, 3-5 Medium, 6-10 Low. Leave it out for 5, an ordinary task.
unrelateNoRefs of linked tasks to unlink. Only these go; the other links stay.
relatesToNoRefs of tasks to link to this one, both ways. Added to the links it already has.
testNotesNoHow it was tested: what was checked, where (dev, a private API, live), the result -- and what was NOT checked. Rewritten whole, like plan; "" clears it.
testStatusNoHow it was tested: untested (the default), tested, partly, failed, or needs-check -- what only a person can confirm (a store build, a real payment, a live page). Never claim tested for a check you did not run; use needs-check or partly and say what is left.
linkDecisionsNoDecision refs (DEC-004) this task depends on. Added to those already linked.
unlinkDecisionsNoDecision refs to unlink from this task.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses that only passed fields change, that moving between lanes requires permission to move tasks, that content changes require edit permission, that plan and testNotes are replaced wholesale, and that existing links are retained. These details go well beyond the schema and clarify mutation semantics.

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?

The description is dense but appropriately front-loaded with the core action. Each sentence adds practical guidance, though it could be slightly more scannable given the number of behaviors and parameters covered.

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 16-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers permissions, partial-update behavior, replacement semantics, link handling, and testing guidance. It does not mention return values or every parameter, but the schema documents the remaining fields and no output schema exists to explain a return shape.

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?

Schema description coverage is already high at 81%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning for key parameters: plan is replaced entirely, relatesTo/unrelate modify links while keeping existing ones, size ranges from xs to xl with xl meaning split, and testStatus/testNotes should reflect what was and was not tested.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource: "Change a task by ref." This clearly identifies it as a partial-update operation and distinguishes it from siblings like fenbs_create_item, fenbs_get_item, and fenbs_delete_item, though it does not explicitly name any alternative tool.

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 clear usage context: set testStatus/testNotes when finishing, keep the plan current, and link/unlink tasks with relatesTo/unrelate. It also states permission prerequisites for lane moves and content edits, but it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool or name a sibling alternative.

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