Skip to main content
Glama

Milanote MCP Server and API by Cotlet

List trash

list_trash
Read-onlyIdempotent

Cards and boards you moved to the trash, with the board each one came from. Lists your own trash, newest first: one entry per trashed card or board with its ID, content and board_id of the board it was on. restore_card puts one back where it was. Milanote keeps trashed items until you empty the trash in the app; has_more is true when it holds more than one page.

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_trash"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses ordering (newest first), scope (your own trash), retention behavior (kept until emptied in the app), and pagination via has_more. These are useful behavioral details not covered by the read-only/idempotent annotations.

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 front-loaded and mostly efficient, covering purpose, return fields, restoration, retention, and pagination. There is slight redundancy between 'with the board each one came from' and 'board_id of the board it was on', but it does not waste much space.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the key return details: one entry per item, ID, content, board_id, and has_more pagination. It also explains scope, ordering, retention, and the related restore action, making it complete for this read-only list tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are inherently simple and the baseline is 4. The description appropriately spends no space on parameter explanations.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it lists trashed cards and boards. It clearly distinguishes this tool from related siblings like restore_card and trash_cards by explaining what is listed and that restore_card performs restoration.

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?

It clearly states this lists your own trash, newest first, and points to restore_card for restoring an item. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or compare against list_boards/search_boards, but the context is clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.