Move a card to a specified board, column, and lane using IDs from the navigation tools. Relocate cards between workflow stages without manual board browsing.
Move a card to an explicit board, column and lane. Obtain valid target IDs using the navigation tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| card_id | Yes | ||
| lane_id | Yes | ||
| board_id | Yes | ||
| column_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| item | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Input schema / properties / board_id / maximumRemoved value: -9007199254740991Input schema / properties / card_id / maximumRemoved value: -9007199254740991Input schema / properties / column_id / maximumRemoved value: -9007199254740991Input schema / properties / lane_id / maximumRemoved value: -9007199254740991Output schema / properties / item / properties / childrenAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "archived": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "board_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "column_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "condition": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "due_date": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "lane_id": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "owner_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "state": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "updated": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "title",
+ "board_id",
+ "column_id"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / item / properties / external_linksAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "card_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "created": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "description": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "external_link_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "updated": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "url"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / item / properties / parentsAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "archived": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "board_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "column_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "condition": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "due_date": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "lane_id": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "owner_id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "state": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "updated": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "title",
+ "board_id",
+ "column_id"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, destructive, non-idempotent operation in an open-world system. The description adds the need for an explicit valid destination, but gives no further detail on validation, failure behavior, or constraints on the move.
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?
Two short sentences front-load the operation and then state the ID-discovery prerequisite. There is no redundant or unnecessary wording.
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?
Together with the required four-parameter schema, annotations, and output schema, the description provides enough context for basic selection and invocation. Naming kaiten_list_boards, kaiten_list_columns, and kaiten_list_lanes and noting any cross-board or lane constraints would make it more complete.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description usefully clarifies that board_id, column_id, and lane_id form the target and must be valid IDs obtained elsewhere. It does not explain how to obtain card_id or map each target ID to a specific navigation tool, so compensation for the undocumented schema is only partial.
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 uses a specific verb and resource—moving a card—and identifies the complete destination as a board, column, and lane. It does not explicitly distinguish this operation from siblings such as kaiten_update_card, so it stops short of the highest score.
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 second sentence gives a concrete prerequisite: obtain valid target IDs with the navigation tools before calling. It does not name the relevant list tools or explain when another card operation would be preferable, but the intended workflow is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.