Skip to main content
Glama
guifelix

MCP Todo.txt Integration

remove-metadata

Remove specific metadata keys from a Todo.txt task by ID to clean up task entries and maintain organized task lists.

Instructions

Remove specific metadata keys from a task by ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskIdYes
keysYes

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that loads tasks, finds the task by ID, removes the specified metadata keys using removeExtension, saves tasks, and returns success or error.
    async ({ taskId, keys }) => {
        const tasks = await loadTasks();
        const idx = getTaskIndex(taskId, tasks);
        if (idx === null) {
            return {
                content: [
                    { type: "text", text: "Invalid task ID." },
                ],
                isError: true,
            };
        }
        keys.forEach((key: string) => {
            tasks[idx].removeExtension(key);
        });
        await saveTasks(tasks);
        return {
            content: [
                { type: "text", text: "Metadata removed successfully." },
            ],
        };
  • Zod schema defining input parameters: taskId (number) and keys (array of strings).
    {
        taskId: z.number(),
        keys: z.array(z.string()),
    },
  • src/tools.ts:251-279 (registration)
    Registration of the 'remove-metadata' tool on the MCP server, including name, description, schema, and handler.
    server.tool(
        "remove-metadata",
        "Remove specific metadata keys from a task by ID.",
        {
            taskId: z.number(),
            keys: z.array(z.string()),
        },
        async ({ taskId, keys }) => {
            const tasks = await loadTasks();
            const idx = getTaskIndex(taskId, tasks);
            if (idx === null) {
                return {
                    content: [
                        { type: "text", text: "Invalid task ID." },
                    ],
                    isError: true,
                };
            }
            keys.forEach((key: string) => {
                tasks[idx].removeExtension(key);
            });
            await saveTasks(tasks);
            return {
                content: [
                    { type: "text", text: "Metadata removed successfully." },
                ],
            };
        }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action is 'Remove' (implying mutation), but doesn't cover critical aspects like permissions needed, whether changes are reversible, error handling, or side effects. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's apparent complexity, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's mutation nature, lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral risks, return values, or parameter details, leaving significant gaps for safe and effective use.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for two undocumented parameters. It mentions 'taskId' and 'keys' but provides no additional meaning—no format hints, constraints, or examples. This fails to add value beyond the bare 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 description clearly states the action ('Remove') and target ('specific metadata keys from a task by ID'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete-task' or 'update-task' that might also modify tasks, missing full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone among multiple task-modification siblings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/guifelix/mcp-server-todotxt'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server