OrgLines

Decision cards: List cards

decision_cards_list

Read-only

The Decision Center cards of this cabinet («Центр рішень»): questions that wait for the owner's decision. Default: the open cards (not resolved/closed) of lane 'clients', newest first. Per card: id, title, summary, plain_summary («Простими словами»), goal / progress / blocker, source ('manual' = «Вручну», e.g. coordination questions), type, status, priority, created_at, the options (key, label, description, pros, cons, risks, recommended), the recommendation, and the current decision if any. Filters: source, status (exact; 'resolved'/'closed' to read finished ones), lane 'dev' (platform dev dashboard users only) or lane 'coord' (the founder's coordination cards from any cabinet, platform dev dashboard users only). To answer a card use decision_card_resolve with its id. Cabinet owner only. Read-only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "decision_cards_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lane`	No
`limit`	No
`source`	No
`status`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish a safe read-only operation, and the description adds substantial operational context beyond them: cabinet-owner-only access, read-only status, default filtering, ordering, lane-specific permissions, and the meaning of source 'manual'. These details materially reduce invocation ambiguity.

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 definition is front-loaded with purpose, defaults, returned fields, then filters and the alternative resolve tool. It is dense and somewhat long, but most sentences earn their place by clarifying scope, permissions, or filter behavior.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by enumerating the key fields returned per card. It also covers permissions, default filters, alternative tools, and lane-specific access, making it complete enough for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries most parameter meaning: it documents lane behavior for 'dev' and 'coord', status filtering including 'resolved'/'closed', and source 'manual' as «Вручну». It does not explain the 'limit' parameter or every source enum value, but the remaining enum names are largely self-explanatory.

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 names a specific resource and operation: listing Decision Center cards for a cabinet, with a clearly stated default scope of open 'clients' lane cards. It distinguishes the listing purpose from the separate action of answering a card by naming decision_card_resolve.

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 gives explicit default behavior (open, not resolved/closed, lane 'clients', newest first), explains how to read finished cards via status 'resolved'/'closed', and directs the agent to decision_card_resolve when the goal is to answer a card. It also states the cabinet-owner restriction and lane restrictions.

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

All OrgLines tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?