Skip to main content
Glama

AgileHero

by io.agilehero
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

add_retro_items

Add items to a retrospective as yourself, several at once: notes on a new-model retrospective where the workspace has them, cards on a classic retrospective board otherwise. Each item is { column, text, recipient_id? }: column is a column title (case-insensitive) or uid from get_retrospective; text is up to 1000 characters (255 on classic boards); recipient_id, the user uid of the teammate thanked, is required in a new-model kudos column and refused on classic boards. A new-model note starts its own topic and others see it once notes are revealed; notes are taken only while the retrospective is open for notes or in the Write stage, otherwise the call is refused with code wrong_stage and the current stage. PARTIAL failure: valid items are added, invalid ones are reported per index — check the "failed" array. Requires a Pro or trial workspace.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYes
retrospective_idYesThe retrospective uid

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / column / description
      Previous value: -"Column name or uid"New value: +"Column title or uid"
    • addedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / recipient_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "New-model kudos only: user uid of the teammate thanked",
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / text / description
      Previous value: -"Item text"New value: +"Up to 1000 characters (255 on classic boards)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / text / maxLength
      Previous value: -255New value: +1000
    • changedInput schema / properties / retrospective_id / description
      Previous value: -"The retrospective meeting uid"New value: +"The retrospective uid"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (which only mark it non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive). It discloses partial-failure semantics with a per-index failed array, stage-gating with the wrong_stage error code, recipient_id being required in new-model kudos and refused on classic boards, note visibility once revealed, and a Pro/trial workspace requirement.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and dense with load-bearing detail, but it renders as one long paragraph rather than scannable segments. Nothing is filler, yet the wall-of-text form slightly hurts readability.

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 carries the return burden itself by explaining the failed array, and it covers preconditions, error codes, limits, and the plan requirement. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With only 50% schema description coverage, the description compensates fully: column accepts a case-insensitive title or a uid from get_retrospective, text has the 1000/255 character split, and recipient_id has conditional requirements. This adds real meaning beyond the schema strings.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add items to a retrospective') and immediately pins the batch scope ('several at once'), plus the two board flavors it serves. An agent can tell it apart from create_card or move_retro_item without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions and exclusions: notes are accepted only while the retro is open for notes or in the Write stage, otherwise the call is refused with wrong_stage, and it routes the agent to get_retrospective for the column uid. It does not name a sibling alternative, but no direct alternative exists for this operation.

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

All AgileHero toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources