Fuegt einem Board eine Karte hinzu. "column" ist optional der Spaltenname (sonst die erste Spalte).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | Text/Titel der Karte | |
| column | No | Optional: Zielspalte (Name) | |
| board_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the core mutation (add) and the optional column defaulting to the first column, which adds useful behavior beyond the schema. However, it does not mention return values, potential errors, or effects such as card placement, which are relevant for a write operation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by a parameter clarification. There is no redundant information, and every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description is adequate for a simple create operation with three parameters, covering the main purpose and the key optional behavior. However, it lacks information about the return value and any failure conditions, which would be expected for a mutation tool, but the simplicity of the tool makes this a modest gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description adds meaning to the 'column' parameter by explaining that it is optional and defaults to the first column, which is not stated in the input schema. It does not provide details for 'board_id', but that is an ID field and the schema covers it implicitly. The schema coverage is 67%, so the description helps fill the gap for the optional behavior.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states 'Fuegt einem Board eine Karte hinzu' (adds a card to a board), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_column or create_board by explicitly naming the target resource (card and board). The additional clarification about the column parameter further specifies the tool's behavior.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is used for adding a card to a board, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like move_card or update_card. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The column default hint offers some operational guidance, but no explicit alternative comparison.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action (board, column, card, tracker, field, entry) with no overlapping purposes. Even closely related operations like add_card vs add_entry operate on different entity types.
Tool names consistently follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_board, add_card, delete_entry, update_tracker). The mix of 'create' for top-level entities and 'add' for sub-entities is a minor deviation but still predictable.
24 tools is somewhat high but well-justified given the server covers two resource families (boards and trackers) with full lifecycle operations. Each tool has a clear role in the overall surface.
The tool set provides comprehensive CRUD coverage for boards, columns, cards, trackers, and entries. The main gap is the lack of an update_field tool, but this can be worked around by deleting and recreating fields.