Remove a subdirectory mapping from your .taskhub.json configuration without deleting the actual TaskHub project. Use to clean up project associations.
Remove a subdirectory mapping from .taskhub.json. Does NOT delete the project from TaskHub.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Relative path to remove (e.g. "./backend") |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the operation modifies .taskhub.json and does NOT delete the project from TaskHub. It doesn't mention effects on the local directory or return/error behavior, but for a simple mapping removal this is reasonably transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences: the first states the action and target, the second clarifies a key boundary. No filler or redundant restatement.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter local config mutation, the description is mostly complete: it names the file affected and the non-effect on TaskHub. It doesn't describe return values or prerequisites, but those are less critical given the tool's simplicity and no output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already covers the only parameter with 100% coverage, including an example. The description adds no additional parameter detail, matching the baseline for fully documented schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a concrete verb ('Remove') and resource (subdirectory mapping in .taskhub.json), and explicitly distinguishes from deleting the TaskHub project. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like taskhub_subproject_add and taskhub_task_delete.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description makes the tool's scope clear: it removes a mapping rather than deleting a project, so an agent can avoid using it for project deletion. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or enumerate when-to-use conditions, but the add/remove sibling relationship makes usage inferable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.