Shortcut MCP Server

Add Label to Story

add_story_label

Adds labels to a Shortcut story by applying the full list of label IDs. Provide all label IDs to set or update the story's label set.

Instructions

Add a label to a Shortcut story by providing the full set of label IDs.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "story_id": "<story_id>",
      "label_ids": "<label_ids>"
    },
    "name": "add_story_label"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No	Must be CONFIRM_WRITE to execute
`dry_run`	No
`story_id`	Yes
`label_ids`	Yes	Full list of label IDs for the story

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses that this operation sets the full label set, implying it replaces existing labels. However, it does not mention the confirm requirement or the dry_run parameter, which are behaviorally important. With no annotations provided, the description carries additional burden but only partially fulfills it.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly communicates the action and key constraint. It is appropriately concise with no redundant wording.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters, the description is too minimal. It omits the confirm/dry_run workflow, return behavior, and when to use this tool vs. siblings, leaving the agent without essential safety and selection context.

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 description adds little beyond the schema: 'full set of label IDs' is nearly identical to the schema's description for label_ids. It does not clarify story_id, confirm, or dry_run semantics. Given only 50% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate for undocumented parameters.

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 action ('Add a label to a Shortcut story') and the key requirement ('by providing the full set of label IDs'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like remove_story_label or add_epic_label by explicitly targeting stories and specifying the full-set behavior.

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?

The phrase 'by providing the full set of label IDs' gives clear guidance on how to invoke the tool correctly: the caller must supply all labels, not just one. It provides clear context for the tool's behavior, though it does not explicitly mention when to use this over alternatives.

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

Deploy Server