Soleil Clusters

List boards

list_boards

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists boards (clusters in the app) with links. One level by default: a workspace's boards, or with parent the boards inside one, paged by has_more and next_offset. depth reads the hierarchy in one answer; deleted true lists boards restore_board can bring back.

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": "list_boards"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`depth`	No	Levels at once, max 20 (at most 500 boards)
`draft`	No	The draft key create_boards returned. Pass it on every call about that draft.
`limit`	No	Default 100, max 500
`since`	No	ISO timestamp
`cursor`	No	next_cursor from the answer before
`offset`	No	next_offset from the answer before
`parent`	No	A board id, or "root" for the top level
`deleted`	No	Deleted boards that can be restored
`workspace_id`	No	Only this workspace; with depth, the one to map
`response_format`	No	Default concise; detailed adds how each board opens and its dates

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`boards`	No
`has_more`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / draft

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The draft key create_boards returned. Pass it on every call about that draft.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish a safe, idempotent read, so the description's job is added context, and it delivers: pagination semantics via has_more/next_offset, the fact that depth collapses the hierarchy into one response, and that deleted boards are retrievable and restorable. Remaining gaps, such as ordering of results or behavior when workspace_id and parent are combined, are minor against the annotation coverage.

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?

Everything sits in one tight, front-loaded paragraph whose later clauses map to distinct usage modes, so no sentence is wasted. The telegraphic compression ("or with parent the boards inside one") costs a little readability but keeps it short.

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?

For a 10-parameter, optional-only listing tool with a full output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers scope, paging, hierarchy and the deleted case adequately. It could say a bit more about how depth and workspace_id interact or what happens at the 500-board cap, but nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description earns more by explaining intent behind parameters: default single-level scope, parent-as-container, and that `deleted: true` is specifically the restore-eligible set. It adds no guidance for `draft`, `since`, `cursor`/`offset` choice, or `response_format`, which the schema already covers.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Lists boards (clusters in the app) with links" gives a specific verb and resource and even glosses the domain jargon. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like read_board, show_board or view_board, so an agent must infer that this is the collection-level listing tool rather than a single-board reader.

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 description lays out the modes: one level by default, `parent` to descend into a single board's children, `depth` to pull the hierarchy in one call, and `deleted: true` to see boards that restore_board can revive. That is clear contextual routing, but it stops short of naming the sibling to use for a single board or for search, so it is not full when/when-not coverage.

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

All Soleil Clusters 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.