Add untracked task files to a Kanbn board column by specifying task ID and column name.
Add an untracked task file to a column in the index.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No | Path to the project root directory | |
| taskId | Yes | ID or filename of the untracked task | |
| columnName | Yes | Column to add the task to |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add an untracked task file to a column in the index' without explaining what modifications occur to the index, whether the task file is physically moved or just referenced, what happens if the task is already tracked, or whether any reversible side effects exist. For a mutating operation, this is a significant transparency gap.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the core action efficiently and does not waste the agent's attention with redundant details.
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?
Given the lack of annotations, no output schema, and the existence of many similar sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'untracked' means in this context, whether an initialized index or board is required, or what happens as a result of the operation. An agent cannot fully anticipate the tool's behavior or prerequisites from this definition alone.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a clear description (path, taskId, columnName). The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as framing the task as 'untracked'. Since the schema handles parameter documentation effectively, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description clearly states a specific action: adding an untracked task file to a column in the index. It uses a specific verb ('Add'), a clear object ('untracked task file'), and a destination ('column in the index'). This distinguishes the tool from siblings like kanbn_create_task, kanbn_move_task, and even kanbn_add_task_to_board by focusing specifically on untracked task files.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kanbn_add_task_to_board or kanbn_create_task. It doesn't mention prerequisites, conditions, or situations where another tool would be more appropriate. Usage context is left entirely to the agent to infer from the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.