monday_search_itemsSearch for items across all boards by keyword. Returns matching items with ID, name, board name, and column values.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Number of results to return (default 20, max 50) | |
| query | Yes | Search query text | |
| _apiKey | Yes | Monday.com API token |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes | Search results |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "items": {
+ "description": "Search results",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "board": {
+ "description": "Board information",
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Board ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Board name",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "column_values": {
+ "description": "Column values for the item",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Column ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "text": {
+ "description": "Column value text",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "description": "Column type",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "created_at": {
+ "description": "Item creation timestamp",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "group": {
+ "description": "Item group",
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Group ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Group title",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Item ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Item name",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "items"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "_apiKey": "your-monday-api-key",
+ "query": "urgent"
+ },
+ {
+ "_apiKey": "your-monday-api-key",
+ "limit": 25,
+ "query": "Q4 planning"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior, so the bar for additional transparency is lower. The description adds context about the search scope ('across all boards') and return fields (ID, name, board name, column values), which goes beyond the annotation safety profile.
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 sentences, zero waste, and front-loaded with the primary action. It efficiently conveys scope and return information without unnecessary detail.
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?
With an output schema present and strong annotations, the description covers the essential behavior for a simple read-only search tool. It could mention ordering, matching logic, or pagination behavior, but those are not critical given the structured context.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter text for query, limit, and _apiKey. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 states a specific verb 'Search' and a clear resource 'items across all boards' with a keyword scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like monday_list_items, which likely operate within a single board rather than across all boards.
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 clearly indicates this tool is for cross-board keyword searches, implying when to use it over other monday tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.
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.
The set has several overlapping tool clusters. ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical in behavior, ai_visibility_check and scan_competitor_ai_presence overlap heavily, and polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, and polymarket_fill_risk all target opportunity-finding/fill-checking on prediction markets. While individual descriptions are detailed, an agent could easily pick the wrong tool among these near-duplicates.
Naming is inconsistent across the surface. The monday_* and polymarket_* prefixes are consistent within their subgroups, and ask_pipeworx_* forms a family, but the rest mix verb_phrase (validate_claim, compare_entities, discover_tools), noun_phrase (entity_profile, recent_changes, suggest_questions), and bare verbs (remember, forget, recall) with no unifying pattern. This makes it hard to predict tool names.
At 36 tools, the surface is overloaded. The Monday.com integration alone only needs 5 tools, and the remaining 31 are a sprawling research/meta-toolkit. Many of these could be consolidated (e.g., ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta, or the several polymarket scanners), so the count feels inflated beyond what the server's core purpose requires.
The data-research and monitoring side is thorough, covering querying, grounding, comparison, profiling, entity resolution, subscriptions, memory, and feedback. However, the Monday.com integration is incomplete: it offers create/list/get/search for items but no update or delete operations, and no board creation or modification. This leaves the Monday workflow with dead ends.