Skip to main content
Glama
kjduling

kanbn-mcp

by kjduling
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kanbn_edit_task

Update an existing Kanbn task's title, dates, progress, tags, assignee, comments, and subtasks. Modify task details in one call.

Instructions

Edit an existing task on the Kanbn board.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dueNoDue date (ISO string)
nameNoTask title
pathNoPath to the project root directory
tagsNoTags array
taskIdYesID or filename of the task to edit
startedNoStart date (ISO string)
assignedNoAssignee
commentsNo
progressNoProgress (0-1)
subTasksNo
completedNoCompletion date (ISO string)
relationsNoTask relations: an array of {task, type} edges (e.g. {task: 'model', type: 'depends-on'}). WARNING: on edit this replaces the WHOLE relations collection — supply the full array, or use kanbn_add_relation / kanbn_remove_relation for merges.
descriptionNoTask detailed description
plannedStartNoPlanned start date (ISO string)
plannedFinishNoPlanned finish date (ISO string)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / relations
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Task relations: an array of {task, type} edges (e.g. {task: 'model', type: 'depends-on'}). WARNING: on edit this replaces the WHOLE relations collection — supply the full array, or use kanbn_add_relation / kanbn_remove_relation for merges.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "task": {
+        "description": "Target task ID the relation points to",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": {
+        "description": "Relation type, e.g. 'depends-on' or 'blocks' (normalised to kebab-case)",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Edit an existing task' without disclosing behaviors like partial updates, error handling if the task doesn't exist, or whether fields are overwritten. The relations parameter warning does disclose that the whole relations collection is replaced, which is a positive signal, but the overall tool description lacks behavioral depth.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. No filler or redundancy. It earns its place.

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?

For a tool with 15 parameters and no output schema, the one-line description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the update model (partial vs full), required preconditions (e.g., valid board path), or what happens on success/failure. The relations warning is helpful but only covers one parameter. The description lacks the context an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is high (87%), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. The relations parameter's description includes a warning about replacement, but that is part of the schema, not the tool description. Thus the description contributes nothing extra.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to edit an existing task on the Kanbn board. It distinguishes from creation (kanbn_create_task), deletion (kanbn_delete_task), and other specific operations like rename or move, making it the general editing tool. The verb 'edit' and resource 'task' are specific.

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?

The main description offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the many specific task-modification tools such as kanbn_rename_task, kanbn_move_task, or kanbn_comment. However, the 'relations' parameter includes a warning that suggests using kanbn_add_relation/kanbn_remove_relation for merging relations, providing a small usage hint. Overall, the description lacks a clear when-to-use statement.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools