Skip to main content
Glama

cnvs.app

by app.cnvs

Set Board Mode

set_board_mode
Destructive

Choose whether this board is a freeform whiteboard ('draw', the default) or a kanban task board ('todo'). Mode is switchable WHENEVER the board is empty of real content: drawings (text/strokes/images) and tasks. Empty or seeded columns DON'T count (switching to 'draw' clears them), so a cleared board can be switched again, and you can flip draw<->todo freely until the first stroke/text/image or task lands. Setting 'todo' auto-seeds three starter columns (To do / In progress / Done). Returns { mode, columns }. Use the task/column tools (create_task, create_column, …) once the board is in 'todo' mode.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeYesBoard mode.
board_idYes
templateNoOptional starter column template when mode is 'todo': 'kanban' (To do / In progress / Done, the default), 'sprint' (Backlog / Sprint / Review / Done), or 'bugs' (Triage / Confirmed / In progress / Fixed). Unknown/omitted falls back to 'kanban'.
access_keyNo8-character lowercase alphanumeric board access key when the board is locked (legacy 6-character lowercase alphanumeric keys are also accepted). Equivalent to setting the `X-Board-Key` HTTP header on the JSON-RPC POST. Omit for unlocked boards. Obtain via POST /api/boards/<id>/lock.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses critical behaviors: switching to 'draw' clears the board, 'todo' auto-seeds columns, and mode can be toggled until content lands. These side effects are not apparent from annotations alone, enhancing transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single lengthy sentence with multiple clauses but remains coherent and logically ordered. It repeats some schema information but avoids excessive redundancy, making it acceptable though not perfectly concise.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description covers the tool's effect (mode change, content clearing, column seeding), the return value, and points to related tools for subsequent actions. It provides a complete picture of when and how to use the tool without an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides detailed descriptions for 'mode', 'template', and 'access_key', covering 75% of parameters. The description reinforces these but does not add clarification for 'board_id', which remains undescribed. Overall, parameters are well explained but not fully enriched beyond the schema.

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: setting the board mode between 'draw' and 'todo'. It explicitly distinguishes the two modes and mentions the default, making the action unambiguous.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (to change board mode) and provides important context such as the ability to switch modes freely until content is added, and that after setting 'todo', task/column tools should be used. This guides appropriate usage.

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

All cnvs.app toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: canvas items (text, image, stroke, link), kanban elements (tasks, columns, lanes), and board-level operations (create, open, preview). Even the two move tools are clearly separated: move for board items and move_task for kanban cards. Descriptions explicitly disambiguate potential overlaps (e.g., add_link vs add_text).

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names overwhelmingly follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_image, create_column, delete_task, update_task). Minor deviations: 'erase' and 'move' are single-word verbs lacking an explicit object, and 'move' could be confused with 'move_task' without descriptions. Overall the pattern is highly predictable.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is at the high end but justified by the dual-mode scope (freeform whiteboard and kanban board). Each cluster has a coherent set covering create, read, update, delete, and specialized operations (bulk creation, export, querying, waiting for updates). Slightly heavy but well-scoped.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows for both whiteboard and kanban are covered: CRUD for text, images, tasks, columns, plus preview, export, bulk creation, and filtering. Minor gaps exist: no board rename/delete, no image resize after creation, and no bulk erase, but these can be worked around.

Resources