ADHD Progress Hub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

dismiss_thread

Soft-close abandoned or superseded threads without marking them complete. Stops irrelevant work while preserving history for later reference.

Instructions

Soft-close a thread that should stop without being marked complete.

    Use for abandoned, superseded, or no-longer-relevant work. Use mark_done
    when the intended outcome was completed, or pause_thread when it will be
    resumed later.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`thread_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.12.0Sep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It conveys a core trait (soft-close without marking complete) and the intended state transition, but does not explain whether the action is reversible, what happens to the optional note, or any visible side effects on thread/workspace state.

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?

Two short sentences, first front-loads the action and outcome, second gives routing guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description is nearly complete for a two-parameter tool: it defines the action, gives usage criteria, and names alternatives; the output schema covers return values. It falls short only in not documenting the note parameter and the exact state transition.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the description does not describe thread_id or note. Thread_id is inferable from the tool name, but the optional note parameter—its purpose, format, and whether it is stored—is left entirely unspecified.

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 opening phrase 'Soft-close a thread that should stop without being marked complete' names a specific action and resource, and immediately contrasts with mark_done and pause_thread. It is unmistakable what this tool does and how it differs from siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly gives the intended cases: abandoned, superseded, or no-longer-relevant work. It also states when NOT to use it, directing to mark_done for completed work and pause_thread for resumable work.

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